DOCSLIB.ORG

The Founding of BRESA

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Founding of BRESA Volume II Appendices I – IV Appendix I THE CASE OF BRESAGEN Parcel 1: Radionucleotides Professor Robert Symons from the Biochemistry Department at the University of Adelaide developed a technique for the efficient production of 32P-labelled radionucleotides that was published in a leading scientific journal1 in 1977. These were radioactive compounds used to label DNA and RNA, and were widely used at the time in gene technology research. At the time, production of these radionucleotides was influenced by two factors: first, being radioactive and with a short half-life of 14 days, international shipping was difficult and costly. Second, manufacture was dominated by Amersham, a UK-based company, using inefficient technology, which kept prices high. This meant that increasingly, when Professor Symons had radionucleotides that were surplus to the needs of his own Department and its Centre for Gene Technology (also established in 1982), he increasingly began providing them for free to other laboratories in Australia. By the early 1980s, Bob Symons’s head of department, Professor Bill Elliott, suggested that rather than giving the radionucleotides away, he should set up a business. However, Bob Symons did not the patent the technique; as Allan Robins, a postdoctoral researcher at the time, commented, ‘this is back in the days when we were naïve academics. Nobody patented ideas, or we didn’t anyway, Bob didn’t’ (interview, 2007). 1 Nucleic Acids Research 1 According to the Bresa Product Catalogue (1984): BRESA [Ltd] was officially set up in [31] May, 1982 to develop and prepare for sale a range of high quality materials for use in gene technology. It is wholly owned by the University of Adelaide and operates from the Department of Biochemistry, which is a major customer of BRESA products. Bresa (Biotechnology Research Enterprises South Australia) was incorporated to function as the trading arm of the Bresa Unit Trust, and at that time was located within the Department of Biochemistry at the University of Adelaide. Robins stressed that the initial intentions motivating Bresa’s establishment lay in securing research funds not private gain: The plan was to build a little reagent business … those guys were very philanthropic in those days so there were four founders of the company and none of the founders took any stock or took any money out of it. The whole idea was to bring money in to support research in the Department of Biochemistry. My understanding is that Bob [Symons], Julian [Wells], John Wallace and Bill Elliott were all down as founders of the company. Bob and Julian were really driving it. (interview, 2007) However, whilst the company Bresa Pty Ltd was freshly incorporated, the idea of making these radionucleotides was not! In fact, Symons had apparently been making them for years, as a former head of department, Professor George Rogers explained: It was in the ’70s, I think, yes. Because he [Symons] was in the [United] States in ’712 and came back and then molecular biology took off and then there was an embargo on doing cloning because of the possible hazards and there was a Asilomar conference in California in 19743 and when they were all cleared we were able to go on with it and Bob started to supply these things [radioactive nucleotides] to the department. The then head of the department was Bill Elliott and Bill said to Bob – I was around when the conversation was going on, of course – ‘You’re giving the stuff to people in Australia as well as the department, you ought to set it up as a business and commercialise it properly and make some money’ rather than being a 2 D.A. Jackson, R.H Symons, and P. Berg in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (1972). 3 The Asilomar conference was actually held in 1975 in California. It is seen as a landmark in the history of genetic engineering, an event that served as an influential model for policy making at that time. Its role as a model for future policy making on DNA technologies has been broadly questioned, particularly since commercial and military interests have been seen as major influences on the field’s development. 2 benefactor, as it were. So that’s really the start of it … (interview, 2007) Bob Symons was collaborating with Paul Berg at the time. It was Paul Berg who is credited with organising the Asilomar Conference in 1975 in California and in 1980, Berg won the Nobel Prize ‘for his fundamental studies of the biochemistry of nucleic acids, with particular regard to recombinant-DNA’. On his impressive CV, only five significant papers are listed and on one of these Symons is a co-author: A Biochemical Method for Inserting New Genetic Information into SV40 DNA: Circular SV40 DNA Molecules Containing Lambda Phage Genes and the Galactose Operon of E. coli. David A. Jackson, Robert H. Symons, and Paul Berg. Proc. Nat. Sci. USA, 69, 2904 (1972). (Berg, The Nobel Institute, website accessed 2008) Moreover, an article on the significance of this paper was written by W.K. Joklik: Like the year 1940, the year 1970 occupies a unique position in the history of virology. In 1940, the conceptualization of the one-step growth cycle by Emory Ellis and Max Delbrück; the discovery of hemagglutination, which provided a rapid and simple means of quantitating virus particles; and the invention of the electron microscope and the ultracentrifuge, which provided the means for studying viruses by physical techniques, converged to initiate the era of molecular virology, molecular biology, molecular cell biology, and molecular genetics. In 1970, the discovery of restriction endonucleases by Ham Smith and K. W. Willcox (J. Mol. Biol. 51:379–391, 1970) provided the means for localizing any gene and of joining any DNA sequence to any other; the discovery of the reverse transcriptase by David Baltimore and by Howard Temin and Satoshi Mizutani extended this technology to RNA by permitting the transcription of RNA into DNA. These two discoveries initiated the age of genetic engineering. Very soon scientists realized that these discoveries would enable them to insert new or modified genetic information into the genomes of living creatures. In order to achieve this, appropriate vectors were required. The vectors of choice for introducing DNA into cells are viruses; and since the new genetic information was to be introduced into cellular genomes, the virus had to be one whose genome was inserted into the cellular genome. The first choices here were retroviruses and papovaviruses. In this paper Jackson, Symons, and Berg chose simian virus 40 (SV40) and devised techniques for inserting foreign genetic information into its genome via use of appropriate restriction endonucleases. This paper is one of the cornerstones on which all 3 subsequent ‘vectorology’ is based, which is the reason why it was selected. Paul Berg was awarded the Nobel Prize in 1980. In his autobiography, Berg talks about this important phase of his research career. The colleagues he refers to are Jackson and Symons: Soon after I returned to Stanford, I conceived of using SV40 as a means for introducing new genes into mammalian cells much in the way that bacteriophage transduce cellular DNA among infected cells. My colleagues and I succeeded in developing a general way to join two DNAs together in vitro; in this case, a set of three genes responsible for metabolizing galactose in the bacterium E. coli was inserted into the SV40 DNA genome. That work led to the emergence of the recombinant DNA technology thereby providing a major tool for analyzing mammalian gene structure and function and formed the basis for me receiving the 1980 Nobel Prize in Chemistry. (Berg, The Nobel Foundation, website accessed 2008) Rogers explained how the Centre for Gene Technology came about, ‘[it was] primarily because there was a real trend in the department for molecular biology and for gene technology and the government started to put these on paper. The whole idea of having a centre or CRC (Cooperative Research Centre) set these up to really give impetus to research in Australia’ (interview with Rogers, 2007). He also talked about the advantages and disadvantages this scheme delivered: ‘The point about that was that it produced a packet of money that was not what one usually got from normal grants. So, it gave a tremendous [boost] to research. Unfortunately, despite the fact that there were eight of us in the department, it was decided because there were limitations put on by the rules of the application we could have had five or six, I think, but we decided that we should just have four. That did give a little bit of ill feeling …’ (interview with Rogers, 2007). In terms then of the arrangement of the Centre within the department, Rogers said: … there was Bill Elliott who was head of the department, there was Bob 4 Symons, Julian Wells and myself and we all had projects which had [involvement with transgenics] - I mean, I was doing animal transgenesis then, which is putting genes into sheep and doing things. Bob was doing all that other thing and Bill had some work to do with diseases and then there was Julian who was into a lot of cloning work and fundamental work on genes regulating expression, but to do with cell differentiation so it was very basic stuff, so they fell together pretty well. That’s sort of how it came about and we applied - we had an extension for nine years, which was quite a lot. We were able to appoint post-docs and PhD students and the groups grew within magnificently. We had equipment we couldn’t otherwise afford.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Fairfax Women and the Arts and Crafts Movement, 1899-1914
    CHAPTER 2 - FROM NEEDLEWORK TO WOODCARVING: THE FAIRFAX WOMEN AND THE ARTS AND CRAFTS MOVEMENT, 1899-1914 By the beginning of the twentieth century, the various campaigns of the women's movement had begun to affect the lives of non-campaigners. As seen in the previous chapter activists directly encouraged individual women who would profit from and aid the acquisition of new opportunities for women. Yet a broader mass of women had already experienced an increase in educational and professional freedom, had acquired constitutional acknowledgment of the right to national womanhood suffrage, and in some cases had actually obtained state suffrage. While these in the end were qualified victories, they did have an impact on the activities and lifestyles of middle-class Australian women. Some women laid claim to an increased level of cultural agency. The arts appeared to fall into that twilight zone where mid-Victorian stereotypes of feminine behaviour were maintained in some respects, while the boundaries of professionalism and leadership, and the hierarchy of artistic genres were interrogated by women. Many women had absorbed the cultural values taken to denote middle-class respectability in Britain, and sought to create a sense of refinement within their own homes. Both the 'new woman' and the conservative matriarch moved beyond a passive appreciation and domestic application of those arts, to a more active role as public promoters or creators of culture. Where Miles Franklin fell between the two stools of nationalism and feminism, the women at the forefront of the arts and crafts movement in Sydney merged national and imperial influences with Victorian and Edwardian conceptions of womanhood.
    [Show full text]
  • No. 33981 2 No
    Pretoria, 4 February 2011 Februarle No. 33981 2 No. 33981 GOVERNMENT GAZETTE, 4 FEBRUARY 2011 IMPORTANT NOTICE The Government Printing Works will not be held responsible for faxed documents not received due to errors on the fax machine or faxes received which are unclear or incomplete. Please be advised that an "OK" slip, received from a fax machine, will not be accepted as proof that documents were received by the GPW for printing. If documents are faxed to the GPW it will be the sender's respon­ sibility to phone and confirm that the documents were received in good order. Furthermore the Government Printing Works will also not be held responsible for cancellations and amendments which have not been done on original documents received from clients. CONTENTS INHOUD Bladsy Koerant Page Gazette No. No. No. No. No. No. GENERAL NOTICE ALGEMENEKENNISGEWING Health, Department of Gesondheld, Departement van General Notice A/gemene Kennisgewing 58 Medicines and Related Substances Act 58 Wet op Beheer van Medisyne en (101/1965): Medicines Control Council: Verwante Stowwe (101/1965): Conditions of registration of a medicine Medisynebeheerraad: Voorwaardes vir in terms of the provisions of section die registrasie van 'n medisyne in terme 15 (7) ..................................................... .. 3 33981 van die bepalings van artikel 15 (7) ........ 4 33981 STAATSKOERANT, 4 FEBRUARIE 2011 No. 33981 3 GENERAL NOTICE ALGEMENE KENNISGEWING NOTICE 58 OF 2011 MEDICINES CONTROL COUNCIL CONDITIONS OF REGISTRATION OF A MEDICINE IN TERMS OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 15(7) OF THE MEDICINES AND RELATED SUBSTANCES ACT, 1965 (ACT 101 OF 1965) 1. The applicant shall ensure that the medicine is manufactured and controlled in terms of the current Good Manufacturing Practices as determined by Council 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Beecham Group PLC and Another V Triomed (Pty) Ltd [2002] 4 All SA 193 (SCA)
    Beecham Group PLC and another v Triomed (Pty) Ltd [2002] 4 All SA 193 (SCA) Division: Supreme Court of Appeal Date: 19 September 2002 Case No: 100/01 Before: Harms, Scott, Mpati, Conradie JJA and Jones AJA Sourced by: PR Cronje Summarised by: D.Harris Parallel Citation: 2003 (3) SA 639 (SCA) . Editor's Summary . Cases Referred to . Judgment . [1] Intellectual property ­ Trade marks ­ Registration of shape as trade mark ­ Where shape is not intended to be used to distinguish owner's products from those of another, it cannot be regarded as a trade mark ­ Application for expungement from trade marks register therefore allowed. Editor's Summary Both parties involved in the present matter were players in the pharmaceutical industry. The Appellants sought the upholding of a trade mark for the shape of a tablet, and a finding that the Respondent had infringed the trade mark. The Respondent imported a tablet with the same composition and shape as that of the Appellants. In the court a quo, the Respondent applied for the expungement from the trade mark register of the shape trade mark. The Appellants launched a counter­application for relief for trade mark infringement. The latter application failed while that of the Respondent succeeded. Held ­ Interested parties may apply to court for the removal of an entry wrongly made or remaining on the trade mark register. The first question posed by the Court was whether the Appellants' shape mark constituted a trade mark in terms of section 10(1) of the Trade Marks Act 194 of 1993 ("the Act").
    [Show full text]
  • IN the UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT for the DISTRICT of DELAWARE ALZA CORPORATION and JANSSEN PHARMACEUTICALS, INC., Plaintiffs
    Case 1:16-cv-00914-UNA Document 3 Filed 10/07/16 Page 1 of 20 PageID #: 24 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ALZA CORPORATION and ) JANSSEN PHARMACEUTICALS, INC., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. ____________ ) REDACTED PUBLIC VERSION AMNEAL PHARMACEUTICALS OF ) NEW YORK, LLC and ) AMNEAL PHARMACEUTICALS LLC, ) ) Defendants. ) COMPLAINT In this patent infringement action, Plaintiffs ALZA Corporation ("ALZA") and Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (collectively "Plaintiffs"), for their complaint against Defendants Amneal Pharmaceuticals of New York, LLC ("Amneal Pharms. NY") and Amneal Pharmaceuticals LLC ("Amneal Pharms. LLC") (collectively, "Amneal"), allege as follows: NATURE OF THE ACTION 1. This is an action for patent infringement under the patent laws of the United States, Title 35, United States Code, in response to, inter alia, the submission by Amneal of Abbreviated New Drug Application ("ANDA") No. 207515, with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration ("FDA") seeking approval to manufacture and sell a generic version of CONCERTA® prior to the expiration of U.S. Patent No. 8,163,798 ("the '798 patent") and U.S. Patent No. 9,144,549 ("the '549 patent"). PARTIES 2. Plaintiff ALZA is a Delaware corporation, having its principal place of business at 700 Eubanks Drive, Vacaville, California 95688. Case 1:16-cv-00914-UNA Document 3 Filed 10/07/16 Page 2 of 20 PageID #: 25 REDACTED PUBLIC VERSION 3. Plaintiff Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc. ("Janssen") is a Pennsylvania corporation, having a place of business at 1125 Trenton-Harbourton Road, Titusville, New Jersey 08560. 4. On information and belief, Defendant Amneal Pharms. LLC is a limited liability company organized under the laws of the State of Delaware and has a place of business at 400 Crossing Boulevard, Bridgewater, NJ 08807.
    [Show full text]
  • Management Team
    Management Team Bruce C. Cozadd Executive Chairman Bruce Cozadd joined Jazz Pharmaceuticals at its inception. From 2001 until he joined Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Mr. Cozadd served as a consultant to companies in the biopharmaceutical industry. From 1991 until 2001, he held various positions with ALZA Corporation, a pharmaceutical company now owned by Johnson & Johnson, most recently as its Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, with responsibility for research and development, manufacturing and sales and marketing. Previously at ALZA Corporation he held the roles of Chief Financial Officer and Vice President, Corporate Planning and Analysis. Mr. Cozadd received a B.S. from Yale University and an M.B.A. from the Stanford Graduate School of Business. Mr. Cozadd serves on the boards of Cerus Corporation, a biopharmaceutical company; Threshold Pharmaceuticals, a biotechnology company; and The Nueva School and Stanford Hospital and Clinics, both non-profit organizations. Samuel R. Saks, MD Chief Executive Officer Samuel Saks, M.D., joined Jazz Pharmaceuticals at its inception. From 2001 until he joined Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Dr. Saks was Company Group Chairman of ALZA Corporation and served as a member of the Johnson & Johnson Pharmaceutical Group Operating Committee. From 1992 until 2001, he held various positions with ALZA Corporation, most recently as its Chief Medical Officer and Group Vice President, where he was responsible for clinical and commercial activities. Dr. Saks received a B.S. and an M.D. from the University of Illinois. Dr. Saks serves on the board of Trubion Pharmaceuticals and Cougar Biotechnology. Robert M. Myers President Robert Myers joined Jazz Pharmaceuticals at its inception and was appointed as Jazz Pharmaceuticals’ President in March 2007.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. Foundation Funding for Australia
    U.S. Foundation Funding for Australia Prepared by Foundation Center in partnership with the United States Studies Centre at the University of Sydney and Philanthropy Australia Authors Executive Summary FOUNDATION CENTER U.S. Foundation Funding for Australia, the first report of its kind, is Seema Shah Director of Research for Special Projects part of a larger project involving the United States Studies Centre Grace Sato Research Associate at the University of Sydney, Philanthropy Australia, and Foundation Center. A primary goal of this partnership is to improve awareness and understanding in Australia of the U.S. philanthropic sector, while also strengthening philanthropic ties between the two countries and Contributors demonstrating the value of transparency within the not-for-profit sector. FOUNDATION CENTER In the current report, we examine the priorities of U.S. foundation Anthony DiRosa Program Assistant funding to organizations located in Australia, as well as funding Angie Koo Research Assistant for organizations supporting causes in Australia. The quantitative Steven Lawrence Director of Research analysis is based on grantmaking data from among the largest Bradford K. Smith President U.S. foundations. The report also presents perspectives of U.S. and Davis Winslow Research Assistant Australian funders on the current role of philanthropy in Australia, David Wolcheck Research Associate specific challenges and opportunities, and what is needed to achieve greater impact. UNITED STATES STUDIES CENTRE AT THE UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY Bates Gill Visiting Professor PHILANTHROPY AUSTRALIA Sarah Davies Chief Executive Officer Krystian Seibert Policy and Research Manager Acknowledgements The United States Studies Centre at the University of Sydney wishes to thank its Board for support of this project, and in particular Board member Mr.
    [Show full text]
  • Notice Under S66 of the Commerce Act 1986 Application by Johnson & Johnson to Acquire the Stock, Assets and Business Of
    PUBLIC COPY Notice under s66 of the Commerce Act 1986 Application by Johnson & Johnson to acquire the stock, assets and business of the Consumer Healthcare division of Pfizer Inc. COMMERCE ACT 1986: BUSINESS ACQUISITION SECTION 66: NOTICE SEEKING CLEARANCE 28 September 2006 The Registrar Business Acquisitions and Authorisations Commerce Commission PO Box 2351 Wellington Pursuant to s66(1) of the Commerce Act 1986 notice is hereby given seeking clearance of a proposed business acquisition. 518689_1.DOC 2 CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 1: TRANSACTION DETAILS 1 The business acquisition for which clearance is sought 2 The person giving this notice 3 Confidentiality 4 Participants 5 Interconnected and associated persons 6 Beneficial interests 7 Links between participants 8 Common directorships 9 Business activities of the participants 10 Reasons for the proposed acquisition PART II: IDENTIFICATION OF MARKETS AFFECTED 11 Horizontal aggregation 12 Differentiated product markets 13 Differentiated product markets 14 Vertical integration 15 Other business acquisitions PARTS III, IV AND V: CONSTRAINTS ON MARKET POWERS BY EXISTING AND POTENTIAL COMPETITION AND OTHER POTENTIAL CONSTRAINTS 16 Allergy medication 17 Products for the treatment of worms 18 Thrush treatment CERTIFICATE APPENDICES 1. Heartburn and indigestion remedies (MYLANTA and MOTILIUM) 2. Worm treatments (COMBANTRIN, VERMOX) 3. Cold, flu, nasal decongestant, cough relief and sort throat medications (CODRAL, SINUTAB, SUDAFED, BENADRYL, BRONDECON) 4. Allergy relief products (ACTIFED, SINUTAB, SUDAFED, VISINE, LIVOSTIN) 518689_1.DOC 3 5. Thrush treatments (DIFLUCAN ONE, DAKTARIN, DAKTAGOLD, NIZORAL, SPORANOX) 6. Shampoo (PREGAINE, ROGAINE, NEUTROGENA, JOHNSON’S BABY SHAMPOO) 7. Hand hygiene (PURELL and MICRO SHIELD) 8. Competitor worm treatment products 9. Multinational pharmaceutical businesses: GlaxoSmithKline, Douglas Pharmaceuticals, Alphapharm, Bayer Group 10.
    [Show full text]
  • Oxford Australia Scholarship Fund
    Oxford Australia Scholarship Fund August 2005 From the Chairman, Oxford First of all, let me thank all the Donors whose generous contributions have made it possible, since the scholarship was first awarded in 1998, for 36 young Australia Scholarship Fund Australians to read in Oxford with financial support from the Oxford Australia Scholarship Funds. I am pleased to report that another four Australians will travel to Oxford over the coming year with the support from the Oxford Australia Scholarship Fund. I would also like to thank the British High Commission for their assistance in the selection of scholars and their contribution to the funding of the Chevening Oxford-Australia Scholarships. The Oxford Australia Scholarship Fund also gratefully acknowledges the considerable support to the scholars from their Alma Mater. At present, the Australian National University as well as the University of New South Wales, University of Sydney, and University of Tasmania are providing supplementary funding to their former students. Professor John W. White In honour of Sir Vincent Fairfax CMG, the founder of the Vincent Fairfax Family CMG, FAA, FRS Foundation and an Oxford graduate, we were very fortunate to receive another generous donation from the Vincent Fairfax Family Foundation in its 40th anniversary year, 2002. Research School of Chemistry The $120,000 donation has provided funding for two three-year life sciences research Australian National University degrees for Australians at Oxford University. We thank the Trustees of the Vincent Canberra, ACT, 0200 Fairfax Family Foundation for their support. Australia The fund raising by the Friends of Magdalen in Australia for the recently opened E: [email protected] Magdalen College Oxford-Australia Scholarship Fund has been very successful and W: http://rsc.anu.edu.au/oxford a scholarship will be available when the fund is complete.
    [Show full text]
  • Explaining Corporate Success Abstract
    Explaining corporate success: Britain’s best performing firms, 1949-1985 D.M. Higgins, S. Toms The York Management School Abstract The paper synthesises theories of competitive advantage in a dynamic framework to explain the determinants of corporate success. A model is presented linking the firm’s resource audit and dynamic capabilities with the rate of market growth. For the purposes of testing the model, an examination of the performance of all British quoted companies during the period is conducted with reference to achieved long run average rates of return on capital employed. The best performing firms are analysed in more detail and their strategies mapped according to the model criteria. Conclusions are then drawn on the possible strategies for achieving long run corporate success in terms of above average financial returns. Correspondence Steven Toms Joint Editor: Business History Professor of Accounting and Finance and Head of School The York Management School Sally Baldwin Buildings University of York York YO10 5DD Tel: (44) 1904-434122 Fax: (44) 1904-433 431 Email: [email protected] http://www.york.ac.uk/management/staff/StaffProfiles/SToms.htm 1 Explaining corporate success: Britain’s best performing firms, 1949-1985 1. Introduction Competitive advantage and more specifically sustained competitive advantage and its determinants, has become an important research topic in the business and management and industrial organisation literatures. Sustained competitive advantage (SCA) implies not just achieving superior returns, but achieving them over a protracted period of time. It is therefore surprising that the overwhelming majority of this literature has not explored the notion of sustained competitive advantage from a historical perspective.
    [Show full text]
  • Glaxosmithkline Plc Annual Report for the Year Ended 31St December 2000
    GlaxoSmithKline 01 GlaxoSmithKline plc Annual Report for the year ended 31st December 2000 Contents Report of the Directors 02 Financial summary 03 Joint statement by the Chairman and the Chief Executive Officer 05 Description of business 29 Corporate governance 37 Remuneration report 47 Operating and financial review and prospects 69 Financial statements 70 Directors’ statements of responsibility 71 Report by the auditors 72 Consolidated statement of profit and loss 72 Consolidated statement of total recognised gains and losses 74 Consolidated statement of cash flow 76 Consolidated balance sheet 76 Reconciliation of movements in equity shareholders’ funds 77 Company balance sheet 78 Notes to the financial statements 136 Group companies 142 Principal financial statements in US$ 144 Financial record 153 Investor information 154 Shareholder return 156 Taxation information for shareholders 157 Shareholder information 158 Share capital 160 Cross reference to Form 20-F 162 Glossary of terms The Annual Report was approved by the Board 163 Index of Directors on 22nd March 2001 and published on 12th April 2001. Contact details 02 GlaxoSmithKline Financial summary 2000 1999 Increase Business performance £m £m CER % £ % Sales 18,079 16,164 9 12 Trading profit 5,026 4,378 12 15 Profit before taxation 5,327 4,708 11 13 Earnings/Net income 3,697 3,222 13 15 Earnings per Ordinary Share 61.0p 52.7p 14 16 Total results Profit before taxation 6,029 4,236 Earnings/Net income 4,154 2,859 Earnings per Ordinary Share 68.5p 46.7p Business performance: results exclude merger items and restructuring costs; 1999 sales and trading profit exclude the Healthcare Services businesses which were disposed of in 1999.
    [Show full text]
  • Sydney Is Singularly Fortunate in That, Unlike Other Australian Cities, Its Newspaper History Has Been Well Documented
    Two hundred years of Sydney newspapers: A SHORT HISTORY By Victor Isaacs and Rod Kirkpatrick 1 This booklet, Two Hundreds Years of Sydney Newspapers: A Short History, has been produced to mark the bicentenary of publication of the first Australian newspaper, the Sydney Gazette and New South Wales Advertiser, on 5 March 1803 and to provide a souvenir for those attending the Australian Newspaper Press Bicentenary Symposium at the State Library of New South Wales, Sydney, on 1 March 2003. The Australian Newspaper History Group convened the symposium and records it gratitude to the following sponsors: • John Fairfax Holdings Ltd, publisher of Australia’s oldest newspaper, the Sydney Morning Herald • Paper World Pty Ltd, of Melbourne, suppliers of original newspapers from the past • RMIT University’s School of Applied Communication, Melbourne • The Printing Industries Association of Australia • The Graphic Arts Merchants Association of Australia • Rural Press Ltd, the major publisher of regional newspapers throughout Australia • The State Library of New South Wales Printed in February 2003 by Rural Press Ltd, North Richmond, New South Wales, with the assistance of the Printing Industries Association of Australia. 2 Introduction Sydney is singularly fortunate in that, unlike other Australian cities, its newspaper history has been well documented. Hence, most of this short history of Sydney’s newspapers is derived from secondary sources, not from original research. Through the comprehensive listing of relevant books at the end of this booklet, grateful acknowledgement is made to the writers, and especially to Robin Walker, Gavin Souter and Bridget Griffen-Foley whose work has been used extensively.
    [Show full text]
  • Memorandum JUL 1 6 201D
    Memorandum Subject Date Additional Quota Letters Received by July 15, 2010 (DFN: 630-08.2) JUL 1 6 201D To From Christine A. Sanncrud. Ph.D., Chief "Barbar• J.Illoockholdt, Chief Drug & Chemical Evaluation Section Regul• torn Section Office of Diverison Control Off cL rl Diversion Control On July 15. 2010, this section received your e-mail requesting a review of seventeen (17) quota applications from sixteen (16) registered manufacturers to determine if there arc any pending administrative/legal actions against these applicants and to advise ODE of the findings. ODOR conducted reviews (NADDIS, CSA, etc), as well as surveyed the responsible field offices for their input and recommendations. Provided below are the results and recommendations. QUOTA APPLICANTS wan NO ADVERSE OR DEROGATORY INFORMATIO N Novartis Consumer I lealth Lincoln (10345) (b)(4);(b)(7)(E) Baxter (10346) Generics Bidco li bda Vintage (10347) Noramco Delaware (10348) Pharmaceuticals International inc. (10349) Pharmedium (10351) Pharmedium (10352) Rhodes (10356) Bio-Pharm (10357) Patheon (10358) Patheon (10359) Watson (10361) B & B (10363) lospira. Inc. NC (10364) Epic Pharma (10366) Mallinckrodt I lobart (10367) Chemtos (10368) Vol. II Page 55 2 Per consultation with the field offices. DEA does not have sufficient grounds to limit, restrict. or deny quota requests from these registrants. Based on this information. ODG suggests that you proceed with the completion of the quota applications. If you have any questions pertaining to this information. please feel free to contact me (b)(6);(b)(7)( or SC C) (b)(6);(b)(7)(C) Vol. II Page 56 Memorandum Subject Date Additional Quota Letters Received as of July 19, 201() (DFN: 630-08.2) stir 2 8 2010,., To Fr ,./"./ Christine A.
    [Show full text]