He certainly stands to be a popular pick with emphasis on science and further research in genomics. His leadership could certainly help keep the development and research for personalized medicine active and alive. I talk quite a bit about genomics and personalized medicine here at the blog so a welcome addition in my opinion as well. Genomics is still so very misunderstood by many and hopefully some of the information here that I try to show in layman’s terms helps a bit. This is a good post and video that offers a nice introduction into genomics.
Last year I had the opportunity to interview Dr. Patrice Milos, Chief Science Officer at Helicos, one of the companies that builds and creates the sequencing machines, and their products is also used at Stanford University. One thing she and I both agreed upon is that it is all in the software, “the code”.
Genomics is playing a huge role in the development of drugs and medicines used to treat cancer. Being able to define and identify one marker, one gene and modify how it reacts is the real basic simple explanation as to how this works.
Life today revolves around the intelligence of “the code” one way or another, genomics or technology. BD
May 23 (Bloomberg) -- Francis S. Collins, the scientist who led the U.S. government drive to map the human genetic code, is the top candidate to run the National Institutes of Health, a person familiar with the selection process said.
Screening for Collins is almost finished, and President Barack Obama may announce his choice as early as next week, the person said yesterday. Collins, 59, would head an agency that Obama has made key to his plans for reviving the U.S. economy and overhauling health care. The 27 institutes and centers under the NIH umbrella employ more than 18,000 people and fund research at thousands of universities and medical schools.
Collins will need to deal effectively “with the conflict- of-interest issues that have swirled around the NIH for the last few years,” Baltimore said. “He needs to be firm about what is acceptable and unacceptable, but needs to give staff flexibility to interact productively with for-profit organizations.”