Last week the NIH announced new Federal funding for neurotechnology R&D (SBIR PA-07-389) and (STTR PA-07-390). These funding opportunity announcements are expected to advance understanding of the nervous system, behavior or the diagnosis and treatment of nervous system diseases and disorders, through support of research, development, and enhancement of a wide range of neurotechnologies.
The National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) is in the process of developing a blue sky vision for neuroscience and neurology to help them develop their goals over the next fifteen years. This vision will serve as the foundation for subsequent planning activities. They are seeking your input. You may answer all of the questions, or you may respond to the subset that interest you the most. The deadline for response is August 31, 2007.
1: What advances should we expect in clinical care for neurological disorders over the next fifteen years, based on anticipated progress in biomedical research? What scientific advances will result in a quantum leap in the care of neurologic disorders, and what aspects of care are likely to remain unchanged?
2: Which major questions need to be answered in order to revolutionize how we understand the nervous system and prevent, diagnose, and treat nervous system disorders?
3: What new technical capabilities have the potential to revolutionize neuroscience research and clinical practice in the next fifteen years?
4: What will the neuroscience research landscape look like in fifteen years, and how can NINDS best contribute?
5. What, if any, infrastructural resources are needed to advance clinical or basic neuroscience research?
6. What ethical, legal, and social issues are likely to arise from advances in basic and clinical neuroscience over the next fifteen years, for which the NINDS should be prepared?
It is great to see NINDS taking such a proactive medium term view. Hopefully, you'll find time in your schedule to answer some these questions. I will.
Bernadette Tansey, staff business reporter at the San Francisco Chronicle, wrote an impressive article that appeared on the front page of today's business section about how I became involved in neurotech and what Casey and I are doing to help accelerate its development. Here is part of the article, but you should really read the whole piece. Brainstorming about the brain - Entrepreneur pioneers systems to allows to allow neuroscientists to share their discoveries:
"If you're Zack Lynch, you look for the next technology poised to take off like a rocket.Lynch, 35, is betting that brain scientists will unleash the next waves of world-transforming discoveries. Since 2001, he has founded a flock of enterprises to track and accelerate the field of neurotechnology, which develops drugs and tools that influence the brain and nervous system. His ventures include conferences, neurotech investment analyses and a fledgling trade association.
The San Francisco entrepreneur began his career working for software companies after writing his UCLA master's thesis on the business transformations caused by the Internet. But he wanted to focus on a technology revolution that was just beginning. His wife and a brother were neurobiologists, and he got hooked on the field's possibilities.
Lynch saw the potential for rapid leaps in the understanding of the central nervous system with the rise of automated research tools such as biochips and brain imaging devices. That scientific progress, he said, could help tackle the psychiatric illnesses and nerve disorders that create an economic burden he estimates at roughly $1 trillion in the United States. Beyond disease treatments, Lynch could envision neurobiology breakthroughs that might improve memory and change emotion and communication.
"The societal implications are profound," he said.
But Lynch decided that neurotechnology businesses weren't coordinating with each other enough to advance their own interests in areas such as government research funding and private investment. No industry group represented the whole sweep of neurotech applications, which covers drugs, devices, diagnostic tests and software, he said. Like his father, Lynch started bringing competitors together to get them talking."
Seriously, read the whole article here. Kudos to Bernadette for her exceptional reporting.
A bill is winding its way through Congress which seeks to remove the term "abuse" from the name of two NIH institutes. The goal is to attribute addiction as a disease and not as abuse. The two institutes would be renamed as follows:
1. National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) would be renamed National Institute on Disease of Addiction (NIDA)
2. National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism would be renamed National Institute on Alcohol Disorders and Health (NIADH)
Senator Joe Biden's bill (S1011) has a Findings section which is very helpful in reframing the perspective about addictions:
S1011: SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress makes the following findings:
(1) Addiction is a chronic, relapsing brain disease that is characterized by compulsive drug seeking and use, despite harmful consequences. It is considered a brain disease because drugs change the brain's structure and manner in which it functions. These brain changes can be long lasting, and can lead to the harmful behaviors seen in people who abuse drugs. The disease of addiction affects both brain and behavior, and scientists have identified many of the biological and environmental factors that contribute to the development and progression of the disease.
(2) The pejorative term `abuse' used in connection with diseases of addiction has the adverse effect of increasing social stigma and personal shame, both of which are so often barriers to an individual's decision to seek treatment.
Senator Joe Biden's bill (S1011) was introduced on 3/28 with Kennedy and Enzi. It is a companion bill to Patrick Kennedy's (HR1348), which was introduced on March 3 with Rep. Sullivan (R-OK) as the co-sponsor. The name of S1011 is "Recognizing Addiction as a Disease Act of 2007" and HR1348 is `NIDA and NIAAA Name Redesignation Act'.
Last Thursday, the Neurotechnology Industry Organization met with dozens of elected officials and policy makers in Washington DC to discuss the opportunities and obstacles facing companies and organizations working to improve the lives of those with brain and nervous system illnesses.
A key topic of discussion with elected Senators and Representatives was the group’s National Neurotechnology Initiative (NNTI), a proposed Federal research and development program designed to coordinate balanced and focused strategic investment across multiple agencies to accelerate development of vitally important areas of the field.
During NIO’s Public Policy Tour, executives from some twenty neurotechnology companies and organizations met with political leaders including directors from the National Institutes of Health and the Food and Drug Administration to discuss the role their offices can play in improving fundamental brain-related research and bringing new treatments for nervous system illnesses more quickly to those in need.
Neurotechnology leaders taking part in NIO’s Public Policy Tour included Accera, Inc, Acumen Pharmaceuticals, Adlyfe, Afferent Corporation, Boston Life Sciences, Brain Resource Company, Concentric Medical, Cyberkinetics Neurotechnology Systems, Medical Device Network of Australia, NeuroScience Associates, Neurotech Network, NeuroVentures Capital, Posit Science, RemeGenix, Sound Pharmaceuticals, StemCells, Inc., Targacept, and The MIND Institute.
Elected officials met with included Rep. Brian Baird, Rep. Joe Barton, Sen. Bob Bennett, Sen. Benjamin Cardin, Rep. Steve Chabot, Sen. Pete Domenici, Sen. Byron Dorgan, Rep. John Duncan, Sen. Mike Enzie, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, Rep. Bart Gordon, Rep. Jay Inslee, Sen. Edward Kennedy, Rep. Patrick Kennedy, Sen. John Kerry, Sen. Herb Kohl, Sen. Trent Lott, and Rep. Todd Tiahrt.
In short, NIO's first Public Policy Tour in Washington DC was an outstanding success with significant support emerging for the National Neurotechnology Initiative.