Today’s Jenna Wolfe Comes Out & Announces Pregnancy (VIDEO)
Today’s Jenna Wolfe Comes Out & Announces Pregnancy (VIDEO) Stupid Celebrities Gossip Stupid Celebrities Gossip News
Source: http://stupidcelebrities.net/2013/03/todays-jenna-wolfe-comes-out-announces-pregnancy-video/
John McAfee Jenny Rivera Pacquiao vs Marquez 4 pacquiao Jim DeMint Dave Brubeck frankie muniz
Mar 26 (Reuters) - Leading money winners on the 2013 PGATour on Monday (U.S. unless stated): 1. Tiger Woods $3,787,600 2. Brandt Snedeker $2,859,920 3. Matt Kuchar $2,154,500 4. Steve Stricker $1,820,000 5. Phil Mickelson $1,650,260 6. Hunter Mahan $1,553,965 7. John Merrick $1,343,514 8. Dustin Johnson $1,330,507 9. Russell Henley $1,313,280 10. Kevin Streelman $1,310,343 11. Keegan Bradley $1,274,593 12. Charles Howell III $1,256,373 13. Michael Thompson $1,254,669 14. Brian Gay $1,171,721 15. Justin Rose $1,155,550 16. Jason Day $1,115,565 17. Chris Kirk $1,097,053 18. ...
Source: http://news.yahoo.com/frances-bruni-makes-emotional-defense-husband-sarkozy-115732062.html
band of brothers presidents george washington russell westbrook horsetail falls ice t president day
Simpler, a new startup that wants to disrupt employee onboarding, is launching today and announcing $1.25 million in funding from Andreessen Horowitz, Kleiner Perkins, Khosla Ventures, SV Angel, Data Collective, and Formation8.Source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Techcrunch/~3/5JT7IQ-AaZ8/
UFC 150 Caster Semenya Medal Count 2012 Olympics victoria beckham London 2012 rhythmic gymnastics Meteor Shower August 2012 jessie j
Location: Greater Accra Region
Description:
Job Title: Executive Educational Manager
Job Location: Accra, Greater Accra Region
.
Responsibilities
Qualification and Requirements
Experience & Ability
Academic Qualifications
Effectiveness Skills
If you are qualified for this position, Send your CV to 1528@jbgh.me or click http://www.jobberman.com.gh/job/6415/executive-educational-manager-at-china-europe-international-business-school-ceibs/ to apply
mexico city earthquake stand your ground law dancing with the stars season 14 david garrard michael bay ninja turtles san antonio weather mike daisey
This post was written by Karina Pena of the Americas Society / Council of the Americas (AS/COA).? Read the original post on their website.
Impact Investing vs. Philanthropy
The first question panelists discussed was the definition of impact investing. The Global Impact Investing Network describes these as ?investments made into companies, organizations, and funds with the intention to generate measurable social and environmental impact alongside a financial return.??Ben Wirz of the Knight Foundation offered a definition of his own, saying it?s ?when you?re making an investment and you?re taking an extra degree of risk because you want a social return.? Risk, Wirz said, is greater when prioritizing social impact over profit. Catherine Clark of Duke University argued impact investors would not unanimously agree that impact is characterized by taking on additional risk and concessionary financial returns. Jocelyn Cortez-Young of Minerva Capital added that impact investing is more sustainable than philanthropy due to earned profit. Nacho Gonz?lez of SociaLab.com sought to reconcile these views by suggesting that impact investing is an evolved, more sustainable form of philanthropy due to its foundation in business practices.
Cortez-Young stressed that the key to a successful impact investment is in finding a feasible solution to a real problem that may be overlooked. Gonz?lez added that innovation in Latin America is different than in the United States?the areas with the most untapped potential can be found in emerging markets where because of the internet, previously unreachable populations are now accessible. The key to the next big idea is finding a solution that provides social benefits to a broader population, Gonz?lez said.
Risk: The Unknown for Impact Investors
Speakers noted that because of increased risk, it can prove a challenge to sell impact investments to traditional, profit-driven investors. Given that impact investing is in a relatively early stage, the space lacks risk metrics sought by traditional investors. By virtue of its socially oriented nature, it is difficult to predict quantifiable returns on investment, and few IPOs have been completed as a reference point. Still, there are ways to pitch these ventures successfully, and Clark noted an increase in angel investors and investment groups looking at the space. Cortez-Young referred to derivatives as an example of investment with a reduced percentage of risk, involving a fixed-income note plus a call option. The call option is an opportunity to invest in something unknown based on the known performance of the note?providing the investor less risk. Cortez-Young argued that the impact investing sphere can learn from derivatives, in that more investors could be attracted to this space if at least a certain percentage of risk can be ascertained.
Speakers also discussed the importance of creating a thorough business proposal. Before presenting a pitch to a traditional investor, one should look into the investor?s areas of interest?such as housing, education, agriculture, and access to technology?and see if these issues can addressed. As Wirz noted, one should also speak in the investor?s own terms, which can be difficult but crucial in securing funding. Cortez-Young explained that a pitch must stress which investments open up sources beyond philanthropy dollars, and move toward endowments and pension funds that seek financial returns.
Building the Impact Investing Ecosystem
Panelists noted the importance of fostering an impact investing ecosystem in Latin America. Currently, private foundations, private banks, development agencies, and private impact investing funds are participating in impact investing. But only a small portion of the $7.9 billion in private equity and venture capital investments in Latin America last year was allocated to impact investing. Co-investing among sectors presents another strategic opportunity for the young impact investing scene, Clark said. She noted that by ?stacking? capital, one can make several deals with different investors at varying levels of capital, thereby securing funding at different stages of an enterprise. Cortez-Young added that a cyclical trend in impact investing has emerged: many recipients of successful Minerva Capital investments tend to go on and invest their own money in other ventures.
View the panel video and full post on AS/COA?s website.
new mexico state kevin rose sessions march madness scores doonesbury padma lakshmi daughtry
Julio Cortez / AP
Wind blows through a tarp hanging from a fence surrounding an industrial site in Garfield, N.J. where toxic chromium was spilled in 1983.
By Noreen O'Donnell, Reuters
Scientists plan to check toenail clippings in Garfield, New Jersey, to determine if residents were exposed to a toxic metal made infamous in California by environmental activist Erin Brockovich.
Chromium, linked to lung cancer, leaked from the now-demolished EC Electroplating Inc. factory and polluted groundwater in a 1983 incident.
Located 12 miles west of New York City, the area is on the federal Superfund list of hazardous waste sites. Some 30,000 people live in Garfield.
"Concentrations in the groundwater, et cetera, are very high," Judith Zelikoff, a professor of environmental medicine at the New York University School of Medicine, told Reuters on Monday.
In the 1983 incident, more than 3,600 gallons of a chemical solution containing chromium were discharged from a tank at the factory, according to the Environmental Protection Agency.
The solution got into the groundwater, which flows toward the Passaic River, about 2,500 feet west of the site.
The city's drinking water comes from a different source and is not contaminated.
The plume is about three quarters of a mile long and slightly more than an eighth of a mile wide, said Rich Puvogel, a project manager with the EPA.
Detecting chromium in groundwater, soil and homes does not necessarily mean that people were exposed, Zelikoff said.
"We hope to be able to relieve their anxiety," said Zelikoff, noting that scientists will begin recruiting volunteers for the toenail clippings within the next three weeks.
Toenails grow slowly and may help to detect chronic exposure, she said.
Very high levels of chromium were found at the factory - approximately 80,000 parts per billion, Puvogel said. Downstream from the site, the levels drop off by several orders of magnitude, he said. New Jersey sets a limit of 70 parts per billion.
The residents' exposure would have come from inhaling or touching chromium that had seeped into their basements, especially during flooding.
"When the water dries, it also leaves a chromium dust residue," Zelikoff said.
Environmental activist Erin Brockovich and her team of lawyers are working to help Louisiana residents displaced by massive sinkhole. WVLA's Kris Cusanza reports.
Inhaled chromium is a carcinogen that increases the risk of lung cancer, according to the EPA.
Scientists, who became aware of the contamination last year, want to test up to 250 residents, including some who live directly above the plume and a control group living at least three miles away, Zelikoff said.
Residents who agree to submit toenail clippings will receive kits containing stainless-steel clippers and instructions. They must be between 18 and 65 and cannot have taken chromium supplements or be smokers.
Last year the EPA removed more than 753 containers and drums of industrial waste from the factory and 6,100 gallons of chromium-contaminated water. The building was demolished in October.
Next week the agency will start sampling the soil at the site to determine what sources of contamination remain.?
Erin Brockovich, a law firm assistant turned campaigner, rallied residents in a California desert town to sue Pacific Gas & Electric over a pollution incident - a battle that formed the basis for a?2000 movie in her name starring Julia Roberts.
?
Copyright 2013 Thomson Reuters. Click for restrictions.hangout todd haley kareem abdul jabbar miramonte elementary school mark jenkins super bowl commercials 2012 mia
FILE - In this Aug. 12, 2011 file photo, Jeremy Lazarus, president-elect of the American Medical Association (AMA) speaks in Portland, Oregon. The Supreme Court will struggle this week with whether it?s legal for patent-holding pharmaceutical companies to pay rivals, who make generic drugs, to temporarily keep those cheaper versions of their brand-name drugs off the market. Now AMA President, Lazarus said in a statement,"The AMA believes that pay-for-delay agreements undermine the balance between spurring innovation through the patent system and fostering competition through the development of generic drugs. Pay for delay must stop to ensure the most cost-effective treatment options are available to patients." (AP Photo/Rick Bowmer, File)
FILE - In this Aug. 12, 2011 file photo, Jeremy Lazarus, president-elect of the American Medical Association (AMA) speaks in Portland, Oregon. The Supreme Court will struggle this week with whether it?s legal for patent-holding pharmaceutical companies to pay rivals, who make generic drugs, to temporarily keep those cheaper versions of their brand-name drugs off the market. Now AMA President, Lazarus said in a statement,"The AMA believes that pay-for-delay agreements undermine the balance between spurring innovation through the patent system and fostering competition through the development of generic drugs. Pay for delay must stop to ensure the most cost-effective treatment options are available to patients." (AP Photo/Rick Bowmer, File)
FILE - In a Jan. 7, 2008, file photo then-Attorney Donald Verrilli talks to media outside the Supreme Court. Now President Barack Obama's top Supreme Court lawyer, Solicitor General Verilli will argue before the Supreme Court this week whether it is legal for patent-holding pharmaceutical companies to pay rivals, who make generic drugs, to temporarily keep those cheaper versions of their brand-name drugs off the market. The Obama administration is taking the position that the agreements are illegal if they?re based solely on keeping the generic drug out of consumer's hands. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci, File)
This March 2011 photo provided Actavis Inc. shows Actavis CEO Paul Bisario at the pharmaceutical company's corporate headquarters in Parsippany, N.J. On Monday, March 25, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court is scheduled to hear arguments of pharmaceutical company interests in recouping billions of dollars spent developing new drugs pitted against the government's desire to get cheaper generic drugs on the market earlier to save American consumers money. "By doing what the FTC wants, you're going to hurt consumers rather than help them," said Bisaro. Fighting between generic and brand-name drugmakers in court is risky and time consuming, he said, while settlements bring certainty, allow generic drug sales years before patents expire and reduce legal costs. (AP Photo/Actavis, Maryanne Russell)
WASHINGTON (AP) ? Federal regulators are pressing the Supreme Court to stop big pharmaceutical corporations from paying generic drug competitors to delay releasing their cheaper versions of brand-name drugs. They argue these deals deny American consumers, usually for years, steep price declines that can top 90 percent.
The Obama administration, backed by consumer groups and the American Medical Association, says these so-called "pay for delay" deals profit the drug companies but harm consumers by adding 3.5 billion annually to their drug bills.
But the pharmaceutical companies counter that they need to preserve longer the billions of dollars in revenue from their patented products in order to recover the billions they spend developing new drugs. And both the large companies and the generic makers say the marketing of generics often is hastened by these deals.
The justices will hear the argument Monday.
Such pay-for-delay deals arise when generic companies file a challenge at the Food and Drug Administration to the patents that give brand-name drugs a 20-year monopoly. The generic drugmakers aim to prove the patent is flawed or otherwise invalid, so they can launch a generic version well before the patent ends.
Brand-name drugmakers then usually sue the generic companies, which sets up what could be years of expensive litigation. When the two sides aren't certain who will win, they often reach a compromise deal that allows the generic company to sell its cheaper copycat drug in a few years ? but years before the drug's patent would expire. Often, that settlement comes with a sizable payment from the brand-name company to the generic drugmaker.
Numerous brand-name and generic drugmakers and their respective trade groups say the settlements protect their interests but also benefit consumers by bringing inexpensive copycat medicines to market years earlier than they would arrive in any case generic drugmakers took to trial and lost. But federal officials counter that such deals add billions to the drug bills of American patients and taxpayers, compared with what would happen if the generic companies won the lawsuits and could begin marketing right away.
A study by RBC Capital Markets Corp. of 371 cases during 2000-09 found brand-name companies won 89 at trial compared to 82 won by generic drugmakers. Another 175 ended in settlement deals, and 25 were dropped.
Generic drugs account for about 80 percent of all American prescriptions for medicines and vaccines, but a far smaller percentage of the $325 billion spent by U.S. consumers on drugs each year. Generics saved American patients, taxpayers and the healthcare system an estimated $193 billion in 2011 alone, according to health data firm IMS Health.
But government officials believe the number of potentially anticompetitive patent settlements is increasing. Pay-for-delay deals increased from 28 to 40 in just the last two fiscal years and the deals in fiscal 2012 covered 31 brand-name pharmaceuticals, Federal Trade Commission officials said. Those had combined annual U.S. sales of more than $8.3 billion.
The Obama administration argues the agreements are illegal if they're based solely on keeping the generic drug off the market. Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, speaking at Georgetown Law School recently, noted that once a generic drug gets on the market and competes with a brand-name drug, "the price drops 85 percent." That quickly decimates sales of the brand-name medicine.
"These agreements should actually be considered presumptively unlawful because of the potential effects on consumers," Verrilli said.
In the case before the court, Brussels, Belgium-based Solvay ? now part of a new company called AbbVie Inc. ? reached a deal with generic drugmaker Watson Pharmaceuticals allowing it to launch a cheaper version of Solvay's male hormone drug AndroGel in August 2015. Solvay agreed to pay Watson, now called Actavis Inc., an estimated $19 million-$30 million annually, government officials said. The patent runs until August 2020. Watson agreed to also help sell the brand-name version, AndroGel.
Actavis spokesman David Belian disputed the government's characterization of the agreement with Solvay. Belian said that in addition to licensing agreement over Solvay's Androgel patents, Watson was being compensated for using its sales force to promote AndroGel to doctors.
AndroGel, which brought in $1.2 billion last year for AbbVie, is a gel applied to the skin daily to treat low testosterone in men. Low testosterone can affect sex drive, energy level, mood, muscle mass and bone strength.
The FTC called the deal anticompetitive and sued Actavis.
The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta rejected the government's objections, and the FTC appealed to the Supreme Court.
The federal district and appellate courts both ruled against the government, AbbVie, which is based in North Chicago, Ill., said. "We are confident that these decisions will be upheld by the Supreme Court."
The Generic Pharmaceutical Association's head, Ralph Neas, said the settlements are "pro-consumer, pro-competition and transparent." He said every patent settlement to date has brought a generic drug to market before the relevant patent ended, with two-thirds of the new generic drugs launched in 2010 and 2011 hitting the market early due to a settlement.
"By doing what the FTC wants, you're going to hurt consumers rather than help them," said Paul Bisaro, CEO of Actavis of Parsippany, N.J.
Bisaro said consumers will save an estimated $50 billion just from patent settlements involving Lipitor, the cholesterol-lowering drug made by Pfizer Inc. of New York that reigned for nearly a decade as the world's top-selling drug.
Lipitor's patent ran until 2017, but multiple generic companies challenged it. Pfizer reached a settlement that enabled Actavis and a second company to sell slightly cheaper generic versions starting Nov. 30, 2011, and several other generic drugmakers to begin selling generic Lipitor six months later. The price then plummeted from Pfizer's $375 to $530 for a three-month supply, depending on dosage, to $20 to $40 for generic versions.
Because generic companies tend to challenge patents of every successful drug, the FTC's position would impose onerous legal costs on brand-name drugmakers and limit their ability to fund expensive research to create new drugs, said the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, which represents brand-name drugmakers.
According to the 2010 RBC Capital Markets study, when trial victories, settlements between drugmakers and dropped cases are combined, generic companies were able to bring their product to market before the brand-name drug's patent expired in 76 percent of the 371 drug patent suits decided from 2000 through 2009.
Consumer, doctor and drugstore groups have lined up to support the Obama administration in this case.
"AARP believes it is in the interest of those fifty and older, and indeed the public at large, to hasten the entry of generic prescription drugs to the marketplace," said Ken Zeller, senior attorney with the AARP Foundation Litigation. "Pay-for-delay agreements such as those at issue in this case frustrate that public interest."
The American Medical Association, the giant doctors' group, believes pay-for-delay agreements undermine the balance between spurring innovation through patents and fostering competition through generics, AMA President Dr. Jeremy A. Lazarus said. "Pay for delay must stop to ensure the most cost-effective treatment options are available to patients."
Drugstores also believe pay-for-delay deals "pose considerable harm to patients because they postpone the availability of generic drugs which limits patient access to generic medications," said Chrissy Kopple of the National Association of Chain Drug Stores.
Eight justices will decide this case later this year. Justice Samuel Alito did not take part in considering whether to take this case and is not expected to take part in arguments.
___
The case is Federal Trade Commission vs. Actavis, Inc., 12-416.
AP Business Writer Linda A. Johnson in Trenton, N.J., contributed to this report.
___
Follow Jesse J. Holland on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/jessejholland
Follow Linda A. Johnson on Twitter at http://twitter.com/LindaJ_onPharma
Associated Pressfiona apple awkward awkward CJ Spiller tracy morgan Chase.com Talk Like a Pirate Day
