Van beleggers
voor beleggers
Uitgebreid zoeken

Beurscodes, betekenis en hulp bij zoeken

Europa

AEX
Euronext Amsterdam
BRU
Euronext Brussels
PSE
Euronext Paris
LIS
Euronext Lissabon
CHX
CBOE Europe, grote(re) EU aandelen
NAV
Investment Funds (NAV)

Noord-Amerika

NYS
New York Stock Exchange
OTC
CBOE BZX Exchange (US)
TSE
Toronto Stock Exchange

Kunt u een instrument niet vinden?

Zoek dan via de zogenaamde ISIN code. Elk instrument, aandeel etc. heeft een unieke code.

Kies vervolgens - wanneer er meerdere resultaten zijn - de notering op de beurs van uw keuze.

Waar vind ik die ISIN code?

Google de naam van het instrument, aandeel etc. met de toevoeging 'ISIN'.

Als zoeken op ISIN code geen resultaten oplevert hebben wij het instrument of aandeel niet in onze koersendatabase.

desktop iconMarkt Monitor
Home  /  Forum  /  Crucell  /  Draadje OT, bijzaken & geleuter in de marge!

Ontvang nu dagelijks onze kooptips!

word abonnee

Crucell« Terug naar discussie overzicht

Draadje OT, bijzaken & geleuter in de marge!

1.189 Posts
Pagina: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 60 »» | Laatste | Omlaag ↓
  1. [verwijderd] 6 maart 2006 08:53
    IMO, goed idee (voorstel Ian) om het geleuter en gekneuter in één draad te plaatsen.
    Overzichtelijk & eenvoudig te passeren!

    gr.(en veel plezier!)

    ************************
    Michael Moore op je dak.........:

    GSK in PR blitz ahead of Moore's 'Sicko' blast at drugs companies

    By Danny Fortson
    Published: 05 March 2006

    GlaxoSmithKline, Europe's biggest drugs maker, is turning its 8,000 US workers into public relations ambassadors as the industry girds itself for further bad press after the upcoming release of Sicko, an exposé of the American healthcare industry by controversial film director Michael Moore.

    The company's Value of Medicine campaign, under which it is encouraging salespeople to meet with local community groups, give speeches and explain the positive aspects of the industry, is the first of its kind. "It allows us to finally tell our side of the story," said a GSK spokeswoman.

    She added that the campaign was not in response to Mr Moore's documentary.

    Ken Johnson, senior vice- president of trade group Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, applauded GSK's initiative and said he expected others in the industry to follow suit.

    "From our perspective, it's not enough for salespeople to be marketers of products. They need to be ambassadors of the industry as well," he said. "We have a great industry and shouldn't be ashamed of defending it."

    The initiative reflects the more proactive approach that the industry has adopted over the past year at a time when its image is at an all-time low.

    Films such as The Constant Gardener and the bookHard Sell: The Evolution of a Viagra Salesman, by a former Pfizer employee, have tarnished a reputation already sullied by drug scandals, such as the 2004 withdrawal of Merck's pain reliever, Vioxx. A poll last year found that 70 per cent of respondents in the US, the world's biggest pharmaceuticals market, thought drug makers prized profits over healing people.

    "... Michael Moore is not interested in telling both sides of the story," said Mr Johnson. "Sensible people will dismiss his work for what it is, a one-sided attack on America's health system."

    However, reactions to GSK's campaign have been mixed. "The pharma industry is in a PR crisis and the stakes are very high right now," said Agnes Shanley, editor-in-chief of trade magazine Pharmaceutical Manufacturing. "Getting salespeople to memorise a bunch of facts is not going to make anyone trust the industry more."

    The drug industry's image in the UK is better than in the US, but "there are clearly matters to address," said a spokesman for the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry. "It is very common practice among companies to regard all members of the workforce as at least partial PR reps."

    Mr Moore has been working on Sicko since 2004.

    news.independent.co.uk/business/news/...
  2. [verwijderd] 6 maart 2006 10:37
    By Jack Woodall

    The Hidden Dangers of Fundamentalism
    A connection exists between disease outbreaks and extreme religious practice


    Polio could pose as much of a threat as suicide bombers. Religious fundamentalism is bad for your health. There are, of course, the ill effects suffered by suicide bombers and their innocent victims. Consider also the sarin gas attacks by the Aum Shinrikyo (Supreme Truth) sect, which killed 12 people in the Tokyo subway in 1995, and sickened 1,000 more. (Yes, I know the media reported 5,000 casualties, but 80% of them were the "worried well" who sought hospital emergency departments because of contact with victims, or consequent anxiety attacks).

    What concerns me, however, is infectious disease. Consider these case histories:

    » The last outbreak of polio in Canada and the United States, in 1978–1979, was the result of travel from the Netherlands, where an outbreak was ongoing, to Canada by members of the Reformed Netherlands Congregation, a religious group that refused vaccinations.

    » In the fall of 1984 followers of the Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh, who had purchased the small town of Antelope in Wasco County in north central Oregon, plotted to take over the county. They tested a plan to sicken many of the county's voters on Election Day by contaminating 10 salad bars with salmonella in the county's largest town, The Dalles. Although no one died, 751 people fell ill. The commune panicked and gave up the plan.

    » In Uganda in 1998, an outbreak of cholera killed 83, and the resurgence of the disease was blamed on members of a sect in Soono Parish who hid patients from medical patrols. The sect was called Red Cross (not to be confused with the international relief organization), a group that collects dead bodies in the belief that resurrection is imminent.

    » When cholera broke out in Zimbabwe in 2002, it spread quickly among members of the Johanne Marange Apostolic Faith sect who were resisting treatment.

    » Most disastrously, in March 2004 the Kano state government in northern Nigeria refused to take part in a United Nations-led campaign to vaccinate West African children against polio. Islamic clerics alleged that the vaccine had been filled with hormones as part of a US-led plot to sterilize African girls. As a result, polio has spread from there, by the end of September 2005, to 11 previously polio-free countries, mostly in Africa but including Indonesia, Nepal, and Yemen. More than 900 cases of paralysis have been recorded, and the outbreak has cost many thousands of dollar-equivalents in mass vaccination campaigns that they can ill afford. Mass campaigns are no longer needed once a country has eradicated polio but must be reinstated after an importation.

    » Also in 2004, the Iraqi Communist Party alleged that the Yazidi religious sect in northern Iraq was facing genocide as a result of poisoning. It stated: "Four hundred cases of poisoning have been recorded, most of which are in critical condition. ... The matter has gone as far as affecting the physician of the only hospital in the village, who died of poisoning." The World Health Organization has investigated and found that 50 cases of gastrointestinal illness (not 400) had been reported in Dohuk in northern Iraq. Thirteen of the cases were from a housing complex in Khanak inhabited by the Yazidi, who practice Zoroastrianism, the ancient religion of Persians and Kurds. The water supply was in poor condition, and it was contaminated with sewage, not poison. This is particularly ironic because, according to the tenets of Zoroastrianism, in order to conserve the purity of water, fire, and earth, the dead cannot be immersed, cremated, or buried; Herodotus noted that the Persians do not urinate or spit in rivers. So the Yazidis would have been expected to take particular care with their water supply.

    » In May 2005, a rubella outbreak in a cluster of unvaccinated religious communities in southwestern Ontario, Canada, also probably originated from the Netherlands in the same way as the polio cases a quarter-century earlier.

    The moral of this story: If you are a religious fundamentalist and care about your health, don't believe every rumor you hear, don't refuse vaccination or treatment, and keep your water supply clean.

    Jack Woodall is the director of the Nucleus for the Investigation of Emerging Infectious Diseases in the department of medical biochemistry at the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. jwoodall@the-scientist.com
    www.the-scientist.com/article/display...
  3. [verwijderd] 6 maart 2006 10:50
    Associated Press
    FDA: Drug Companies Drop Ball on Studies
    By ANDREW BRIDGES , 03.03.2006, 07:18 PM

    Drug companies sometimes are allowed to hurry medicines to market in exchange for a promise to continue studying their safety and effectiveness. Those studies haven't begun in two-thirds of cases, the government reported Friday.

    The Food and Drug Administration said Friday that drug companies had pledged to conduct 1,231 drug studies. But as of Sept. 30, 797 - or 65 percent - were still pending.

    "That doesn't mean they will never be started," said Dr. John Jenkins, director of the FDA's Office of New Drugs.

    Dr. Alastair Wood, associate dean of Vanderbilt Medical School, said if the FDA doesn't require the studies to be done, it shouldn't ask for them in the first place.

    "It's astonishing, really. Their job is to get the studies done and not be an apologist for their not getting done," Wood said.

    Federal regulators often grant new drugs expedited approval on condition that their manufacturers then carry out so-called "post-marketing" studies. The outcome of those studies can lead to changes in how a drug is made, prescribed and used.

    Of the 797 studies still pending, commitments for 116 of them were made during the previous year. The clinical trials required under the commitments can take six months to a year to design and launch, Jenkins said.

    Some studies had been agreed to years earlier, but the FDA didn't provide a breakdown.

    The pending studies represent a slight dip from the 812 still pending as of a year earlier, according to FDA documents. FDA spokeswoman Kathleen Quinn said the agency feels that "these numbers show drug companies are taking this thing seriously."

    Alan Goldhammer, of the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, an industry group, said the figures should not be "distorted."

    "To be clear, pending does not mean delayed. It does mean, however, that the immense and vitally important tasks of developing research protocols, finding investigators and researchers and even recruiting patients to participate in the study is in process," Goldhammer said.

    Dr. Jerry Avorn, a Harvard Medical School professor and author of "Powerful Medicines," in which he criticizes the FDA's post-marketing system, said the numbers show the system is broken.

    "This new information is an embarrassing continuation of similar reports issued by FDA each year on the appalling state of the medication safety studies it has 'mandated' drug manufacturers to perform. It is scandalous that of the supposedly active studies, about two-thirds haven't even been started yet," Avorn said.

    The FDA says it relies on the so-called Phase 4 studies to gather additional information about a drug's safety, efficacy or use. The FDA also can require the studies after it has approved a drug, including to better determine its safe use in children.

    The report, posted to the FDA Web site, lists 231 studies as ongoing, 28 as delayed and three as terminated as of Sept. 30. Another 172 studies are listed as completed or terminated, with a final report submitted to the agency.

    The report also tallies studies required of biological products, which include vaccines, blood components and transplant tissues. There, of 321 study commitments, 118 - or 37 percent - remained pending as of Sept. 30. Another 56 were completed by that date.

    "The underlying problem is that the FDA has little ability to enforce these commitments, short of withdrawing approval for the drug - an outcome that may not serve the public health well. The great majority of post-marketing studies address safety issues, at least in part, so patients and physicians are denied critical safety information when these studies are not completed in a timely fashion," said Peter Lurie, deputy director of the watchdog group Public Citizen's Health Research Group.

    Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, and Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., introduced legislation last year that would give the FDA added authority to require drug companies to carry out studies of their drugs once they've been approved and are being sold.

    The FDA plans to award a contract in coming weeks to evaluate and improve the process of how the studies are developed and implemented, Quinn said.
    www.forbes.com/home/feeds/ap/2006/03/...
  4. [verwijderd] 6 maart 2006 15:38
    Off the beaten path

    Biotech is no longer the exclusive domain of Western economies. A group of experts from around the world discuss emerging trends and opportunities for biotech in territories outside the United States and Europe.
    Jonathan Buckley1, Jorge Gatica2, Mark Tang5, Halla Thorsteinsdóttir6, Alok Gupta3, Sabine Louët4, Min-Chol Shin7 & Mark Wilson8


    Since the inception of the biotech in the late 1970s, the United States and latterly Europe have dominated the industry's landscape. But the signs are that may be changing. A recent report, Beyond Borders, The Global Biotechnology Report 2005, from consultants Ernst & Young, indicates that Australia, Israel, China and India now have the 5th, 8th, 9th and 11th largest biotech sectors in the world. Other countries, such as Cuba, Japan and Taiwan, which have long been nurturing biotech ambitions, continue to mature. And elsewhere, several emerging economies, such as Brazil, Chile, Singapore, South Africa and South Korea, are hoping to kickstart their biotech sectors.

    Erin Boyle

    In this article, Nature Biotechnology solicits the views of several experts on the prospects for biotech in Australia, Chile, Cuba, China, India, South Africa and South Korea. What emerges is a diverse patchwork of biotech competencies, each with their specific strengths, but all unified by a common lament—the difficulty of creating a robust and sustainable financing environment for life science ventures.
    www.nature.com/news/2006/060306/full/...

    Australia
    www.nature.com/news/2006/060306/full/...

    Chile
    www.nature.com/news/2006/060306/full/...

    China
    www.nature.com/news/2006/060306/full/...

    Cuba
    www.nature.com/news/2006/060306/full/...

    India
    www.nature.com/news/2006/060306/full/...

    South Korea
    www.nature.com/news/2006/060306/full/...

    South Africa
    www.nature.com/news/2006/060306/full/...
  5. [verwijderd] 6 maart 2006 15:54
    It was US investors that largely bankrolled the biotech industry over the past 25 years.

    Is all that about to change?
    Michael Fitzgerald investigates.


    Ask nearly any biotech CEO which capital markets have figured most prominently in biotech financing over the past 25 years and he or she will tell you, quite simply, the US capital markets. To be sure, the importance to biotech of venture capitalists and private equity investors cannot be overestimated; private investors breathe life into struggling startups. But make no mistake, it has been the long-term capital flowing from the likes of the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE), American Stock Exchange (AMEX) and, most importantly, the NASDAQ stock market that has played the pivotal role in making the US biotech industry by far the world's largest in both market value and product sales. It is no secret that most biotechs based outside of the US have created, or plan to create, a US base of operations in part to gain access to these capital markets one day. As a result, US capital markets play a pivotal role in the fate and fortune of most of the global biotech industry.

    But will US capital markets be as important ten years from now? Up until a few months ago, the answer would have most certainly been, yes. Now that the numbers have been tallied for the US and Europe, which account for over three-quarters of the world's biotech financing, some say the answer is no longer clear cut. So from where in the world will the money be flowing into biotech over the next decade? Will it lead beyond New York City, home of the NASDAQ, NYSE and AMEX? Contrarians say, yes; veterans say, unlikely.

    Contrarians' lament

    Last year was a banner year for European biotech investing. In fact, 2005 marked the first time in the 30-year history of biotech that more biotech firms went public in Europe than in the US.

    Contrarians point out that there were more initial public offerings (IPOs) in Europe than in the US—23 offerings to 18. European firms raised slightly more money, too: $916 million compared with $900 million in the US (Fig. 1). Veterans, of course, note that these European numbers include a $200-million IPO of the 76-year old French pharmaceutical maker Ipsen based in Paris. Still, both contrarians and veterans can agree on one thing: these financing numbers stand in sharp contrast to 2004 when 34 biotech firms went public in the US and only 12 floated in Europe.

    Lees verder via:
    www.nature.com/news/2006/060227/full/...
  6. [verwijderd] 6 maart 2006 15:57
    Finding the moral high ground
    Biotech companies will be facing particular ethical challenges as their products enter the marketplace.
    How is the industry preparing?
    Ken Wilan investigates.
    Ken Howard Wilan1 & Laura DeFrancesco2


    Just three months after European biotech flagship, Serono, was fined $740 million for kickbacks promoting off-label use of its AIDS drug, Serostim (somatotropin)1—the largest fine of its kind ever levied—the US biotech company Genentech of S. San Francisco, California, may be facing similar charges. On January 11, the US government unsealed a whistle-blower lawsuit, which was filed last July by a former employee who was fired, he claims, for pointing out to superiors that Genentech's cancer drug, Rituxan (rituximab) was being illegally promoted for patients suffering from rheumatoid arthritis2. (Off-label use of prescription drugs is not illegal, but promoting it is.) This is not the first hint that something was amiss with Rituxan. In October, 2004, the US Attorney in Philadelphia subpoenaed documents relating to its marketing3.

    Although Genentech may weather this storm—they have, with Biogen Idec of Cambridge, Massachusetts, which developed the drug, already made application to the FDA for expanded use of Rituxan for arthritis sufferers—this may presage ever greater scrutiny by regulators and prosecutors of the industry's business practices. The question is whether biotech companies are prepared for such scrutiny. At a recent investor conference in the Bay Area3, a panel of veteran biotech industry insiders posed the question, Can the biotech industry maintain the moral high ground and not jeopardize its business? The answer was a resounding yes, but it may take some rethinking and long-term planning to get there.

    Especially (biotech) ethics

    The drug industry faces some of the same ethical issues as any industry—how to treat employees, how to conduct and disclose its business practices—much of which comes under the rubric of business ethics and is covered by statutes. However, drug developers face some unique ethical challenges associated with the production and testing of products that affect health and the quality of life. Biotech, in particular, faces ambiguity as the technology runs ahead of society's ability to make sense of the changes it may cause. And because of its impact on human health, the atmosphere can be highly charged compared to other technologies like computer software or polymer science.


    "We have a fundamental dilemma. Organized industry is market driven, but what we produce is also viewed as an entitlement," says Steven Holtzman, CEO of Infinity Pharmaceuticals in Cambridge, Massachusetts. "If you're going to profit from sickness, people will hold you to a very high standard."

    It is this conflict—between the need to make money and the desire to offer medication to those who need it—that creates ethical challenges for biotech companies with drugs in clinical trials or on the market. Pricing, distribution and availability become quasi-moral situations in biotech whereas with other consumer products, similar issues would be treated merely as business decisions.

    In addition, some believe there exists a corporate responsibility for translating promising technologies into products for social good. This becomes problematic when funds are limited and the tendency from investors and the markets is to pursue sure things rather than truly innovative, groundbreaking research. "What happens to all the brilliant innovation that is happening at the academic level if investors are not willing to fund the translation of that into the beginnings of commercial development projects?" asks Charles Hsu, venture partner at Pappas Ventures, headquartered in Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. What are the social consequences of setting up duplicate infrastructures as multiple companies go after the same, often me-too drugs? Leaving it up to market forces may not work, says Hsu, whereas setting public policy to create more funding, in an era of dwindling federal budgets, may not be a viable solution either.

    Keeping a business afloat, especially during financially troubled times, can cause stress, which in turn can affect decision making and cause executives to push the ethical envelope—such as not being forthright in disclosure, minimizing problems and spinning developments for the press. According to Brian Cunningham, CEO of biotech startup DaoGen of Burlingame, California, the venture capital culture adds to the problem, with its emphasis on short-term goals. The mentality of the startup, where the primary goal is to bring in dollars, lingers well beyond the time necessary, he says.

    Meer via:
    www.nature.com/news/2006/060227/full/...
  7. [verwijderd] 6 maart 2006 16:02
    Ten years of biotech gaffes

    Much of biotech's success has been built on lessons learned from mistakes. But the past ten years has also witnessed mistakes many in biotech would prefer to forget.
    John Hodgson


    On the occasion of Nature Biotechnology's 10th anniversary, it would seem right and proper to celebrate some of biotech's greatest achievements. But I shall leave the plaudits to others, elsewhere in the journal. This article is about biotech's memorable gaffes, the deeds or events that their doers would rather forget. In a field of human endeavor where so much is about transforming something that is hardly known into plausible products for unserved markets, it would be surprising if no mistakes were made along that tricky way. From the appointment of the wrong executives to the misworded legal document, most biotech companies are replete with everyday errors, the kind of mistakes that could happen to anyone and which are readily and rapidly correctable, almost before anyone finds out. I will be leaving such trifles unconsidered. What I deal with here are the 'bio-bloopers' that mattered, the events that had, or still have, repercussions for the life science industry or for those who depend on it.

    This is not a definitive list of the errors and idiocy prevalent in this industry and the gaffes are presented in no particular order. Other goofs should doubtless have been included, and I encourage readers to send feedback on major omissions to the journal.

    Gaffe 1: Clinton and Blair joint declaration

    Throughout the latter half of the 1990s, biotech investors had been getting rather heated over the prospects of companies involved in genomics (or companies who had merely donned the genomics mantle). The fever mounted towards the end of 1999 when Nature published the first completed DNA sequence of a human chromosome (chromosome 22), when the billionth base of the human genome was sequenced and when Celera Genomics (Rockville, MD, USA) and a consortium of academic partners prepared to publish the completed fruitfly genome.

    Meanwhile, investors were throwing money at companies, such as Celera and Human Genome Sciences (Rockville, MD, USA) and Millennium (Cambridge, MA, USA). These three companies each raised close to a $1 billion on the back of follow-on offerings and convertible instruments, whereas others, such as Abgenix (Fremont, CA, USA), Gene Logic (Gaithersburg, MD, USA), Incyte (Palo Alto, CA, USA) and Medarex (Princeton, NJ, USA) raised $250–600 million each. The investment sentiment was that genomics was going to provide the key to designing more effective drugs through an increased understanding of the molecular targets that genomics projects would be able to associate with particular disease conditions.

    The genomics revolution, as it was painted, was characterized as a land-grab in which the greatest potential for profitable drug making would lie with those companies who were able to lay claim to the largest slice of the human genome and that success in genome grabbing would come to those who went into the endeavor with the greatest resources. Thus, investors figured that the more they put into a company, the more they would get out.

    Their bubble was burst by President Bill Clinton and Prime Minister Tony Blair at a press conference held in the White House on March 14, 2000. The two heads of government called for the information from the human genome sequence to be made fully accessible to all people.

    The fallout. The warm, fuzzy joint declaration was broadly interpreted as a move to end the controversy over patents based on sequence-tagged sites, thousands of which were awaiting examination at the US Patent and Trademark Office. Biotech stock values immediately plummeted 20% and the event proved to be more or less the start of a 'nuclear winter' for biotech financing.

    In the event, it didn't matter whether or not Blair and Clinton had actually intended to imply that sequence patents should not be granted. The market now understood, as if it had just awoken from a dream, that the value of the human genome couldn't be measured by the height of paper describing sequence-tagged sites or sequence claims. Genomic associations might strip away some of the inherited factors from complex diseases and they might help identify targets for drug development, but the value in the process lay more or less exactly where it always had—in the ability to bring molecules through clinical development and deliver them to patients.

    The take-home lesson: just because everyone says that the emperor's new clothes are wonderful, it doesn't mean he isn't just standing there in the buff.

    Meer, oa ImClone:
    www.nature.com/news/2006/060306/full/...
  8. [verwijderd] 12 maart 2006 11:14
    T.a.v. de liefhebbers van "mooie rooie":

    The Times March 11, 2006

    Brush, floss and raise a glass of red to your teeth

    By Nigel Hawkes Health Editor

    RED wine could help to protect teeth by staving off gum disease, according to Canadian scientists.
    But non-drinkers need not fret. The components found in red wine are also in cranberry juice, as a team from the Université Laval, in Quebec, reported yesterday at a meeting of the American Association for Dental Research in Orlando, Florida.

    Periodontitis is a common cause of tooth loss because it affects the bones as well as the gums, loosening teeth. About14 per cent of people between the ages of 21 and 50, and 65 per cent of those over 50 suffer from the disease.

    The disease is caused by bacteria that stimulate the immune cells and release highly active oxygen free radicals. The Quebec team, led by Daniel Grenier, say that the antioxidants in many fruits and vegetables — and in red wine — can counter the free radicals.

    The antioxidants involved are called polyphenols. The research, reported in the March issue of the Journal of Dental Research, shows that polyphenols are effective in scavenging the free radicals and reducing the inflammatory responses provoked by the bacteria.

    The antioxidant properties of red wine polyphenols could be useful in the prevention and treatment of inflammatory periodontal diseases as well as other disorders involving free radicals, the researchers conclude.
    www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,11069-2079934,00.html

  9. [verwijderd] 12 maart 2006 11:24
    quote:

    flosz schreef:

    T.a.v. de liefhebbers van "mooie rooie":

    The Times March 11, 2006

    Brush, floss and raise a glass of red to your teeth

    By Nigel Hawkes Health Editor

    RED wine could help to protect teeth by staving off gum disease, according to Canadian scientists.
    But non-drinkers need not fret. The components found in red wine are also in cranberry juice, as a team from the Université Laval, in Quebec, reported yesterday at a meeting of the American Association for Dental Research in Orlando, Florida.

    Periodontitis is a common cause of tooth loss because it affects the bones as well as the gums, loosening teeth. About14 per cent of people between the ages of 21 and 50, and 65 per cent of those over 50 suffer from the disease.

    The disease is caused by bacteria that stimulate the immune cells and release highly active oxygen free radicals. The Quebec team, led by Daniel Grenier, say that the antioxidants in many fruits and vegetables — and in red wine — can counter the free radicals.

    The antioxidants involved are called polyphenols. The research, reported in the March issue of the Journal of Dental Research, shows that polyphenols are effective in scavenging the free radicals and reducing the inflammatory responses provoked by the bacteria.

    The antioxidant properties of red wine polyphenols could be useful in the prevention and treatment of inflammatory periodontal diseases as well as other disorders involving free radicals, the researchers conclude.
    www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,11069-2079934,00.html


    Flosz, begrijp ik het goed, dat als Hans en Dirk moeten stoppen met drinken van hun internist, het dagelijks spoelen van de mond met rode wijn ook afdoende is?

    Psycho
    altijd proactief en behulpzaam
  11. Hans Igor 12 maart 2006 12:20
    quote:

    psycho-pharma schreef:

    [quote=flosz]
    T.a.v. de liefhebbers van "mooie rooie":

    The Times March 11, 2006

    Brush, floss and raise a glass of red to your teeth

    [/quote]

    Flosz, begrijp ik het goed, dat als Hans en Dirk moeten stoppen met drinken van hun internist, het dagelijks spoelen van de mond met rode wijn ook afdoende is?

    Psycho
    altijd proactief en behulpzaam
    Flosz en Psycho, waarom denken jullie dat mijn tandarts onlangs failliet is gegaan? Maar er is nog meer:

    Levensgenieters opgelet. Wie lang en gezond wil leven, doet er goed aan regelmatig pure chocolade te eten en veel rode wijn te drinken. Een reep chocolade doet ongeveer evenveel goed als een stronk broccoli. De chocolade moet alleen wel puur zijn, géén melk.
    Het is een doktersadvies om van te dromen. Hoge bloeddruk? Hier, eet wat chocolade. U wilt gezonder leven? Kom, neem een wijntje.
    Toch is dat ongeveer de indruk die achterblijft, nu niet minder dan drie onderzoeksteams onafhankelijk van elkaar ontdekken dat pure chocolade en rode wijn tjokvol zitten met heilzame stoffen. Pure chocolade en wijn zouden de kans op hart- en vaatziekten en op kanker flink moeten verkleinen.
    "
    Chocolade bevat veel 'flavonoïden', en die stof ruimt schadelijke, hoog reactieve zuurstofmoleculen ('vrije radicalen') op. Bovendien verlagen flavonoïden het cholesterol en gaan ze de vorming van bloedstolsels tegen. Dat zou betekenen dat pure chocolade net zo werkt als broccoli of tomaat. Het houdt het lichaam schoon, en voorkomt beschadigingen.

    Bij rode wijn draait het om de stof 'resveratrol'. Ook die stof ruimt vrije radicalen op, maar nu blijkt resveratrol ook nog eens de productie aan te wakkeren van een heilzaam enzym genaamd 'sirtuïne'. Beide effecten zouden ervoor zorgen dat rode wijn kanker voorkomt, hart- en vaatziekten tegengaat en als extraatje ook nog eens ouderdomskwalen als botontkalking uitstelt.

    Maar ja... als iedereen hier gevolg aan geeft is de bio-industrie straks helemaal niet meer nodig en moeten we gaan investeren in de bio-vinologie.

    Maar voorlopig nog gewoon: Go Grand Cru-cell!!!
    Hans Igor (ga snel m'n tanden weer eens poetsen, want dat moet na al die chocolade)

    P.S. link naar noorderlicht.vpro.nl/artikelen/13919171/

  12. [verwijderd] 12 maart 2006 15:21
    Hans, wat denk je, zal ik nog een glaasje rood en stukje puur toevoegen aan m'n lijstje supplementen (bij de espresso's)...
    OPC (oligomere procyanidines), 200 mg.
    Genisteïne:daidzeïne:glyciteïne (isoflavonen uit soja), 1400 mg. ratio g:d:g=1,0:3,3:5,0
    Groene thee extract, 250 mg.
    Lycopeen,10 mg. (puur)
    Omega 3-6-9( niet onbelangrijk, oa visolie in een voor vegetariërs geschikte capsule)(lol),140 mg.
    Selenium, 50 mcg
    Melatonine, 9 mg.
    Katteklauw, 75 mg.
    Curcuma Longa, 600 mg.
    Quercetine, 500 mg.
    + een paar antoxid plus (uitgebreide antioxidantenformule)

    .....Can I have another piece of chocolate cake. (Crowded House)
    gr. (eet & drink ook wel eens wat)
  17. [verwijderd] 12 maart 2006 20:48
    Glaxo pulls out of Serono bidding: report
    Staff and agencies
    12 March, 2006

    58 minutes ago

    LONDON - GlaxoSmithKline (GSK.L) has pulled out of the bidding for Swiss biotech firm Serono (SEO.VX) after a U.S. advisory panel backed the relaunch of a multiple sclerosis drug made by rivals, the Business newspaper reported on Sunday.

    GlaxoSmithKline had been among those looking at a cut-price bid for Serono of $11-12 billion after an earlier auction for up to $15 billion failed to find buyers, people familiar with the situation told Reuters in January.

    The Business, without citing a source for its report, said that Ernesto Bertarelli, Serono‘s chief executive and controlling shareholder, refused to accept GlaxoSmithKline‘s lower price.

    A Food and Drug Administration - ), putting pressure on Serono‘s competing Rebif drug. Tysabri was pulled from the market last year when it was linked to a rare, life-threatening infection.

    GlaxoSmithKline and Serono were not immediately available for comment.
    www.leadingthecharge.com/stories/news...
  18. [verwijderd] 12 maart 2006 21:28
    quote:

    flosz schreef:

    Glaxo pulls out of Serono bidding: report
    Staff and agencies
    12 March, 2006

    58 minutes ago

    LONDON - GlaxoSmithKline (GSK.L) has pulled out of the bidding for Swiss biotech firm Serono (SEO.VX) after a U.S. advisory panel backed the relaunch of a multiple sclerosis drug made by rivals, the Business newspaper reported on Sunday.

    GlaxoSmithKline had been among those looking at a cut-price bid for Serono of $11-12 billion after an earlier auction for up to $15 billion failed to find buyers, people familiar with the situation told Reuters in January.

    The Business, without citing a source for its report, said that Ernesto Bertarelli, Serono‘s chief executive and controlling shareholder, refused to accept GlaxoSmithKline‘s lower price.

    A Food and Drug Administration - ), putting pressure on Serono‘s competing Rebif drug. Tysabri was pulled from the market last year when it was linked to a rare, life-threatening infection.

    GlaxoSmithKline and Serono were not immediately available for comment.
    www.leadingthecharge.com/stories/news...
    ' LONDON - GlaxoSmithKline (GSK.L) has pulled out of the bidding for Swiss biotech firm Serono (SEO.VX) after a U.S. advisory panel backed the relaunch of a multiple sclerosis drug made by rivals, the Business newspaper reported on Sunday. '

    Ik neem aan dat ze hier de drug Tysabri van Biogen mee bedoelen ?
    Grtz, S
  19. [verwijderd] 12 maart 2006 21:40
    Prima forum weekend, kan ik stellen! Leuke nieuwe artikelen, goede commentaren en een vrolijke opgewekte stemming.
    Hans Igor heeft de juiste flessen weer ontkurkt en we hadden geen gezamelijke vijand nodig in de vorm van een basher.
    Eigenlijk is het op dit moment leuker zonder veranderende koersen die de pret drukken, dan de momenten waarop met een voortdurend schuin oog op de Binck-site gekeken wordt. Maar goed die (betere) tijden komen ook wel weer. Dit zijn nu de weekenden waar je Crucell-vrolijk van wordt.
    Wel weer eens tijd voor een gezamelijke neut! Bij mij is de werkdrukte weer op aanvaardbaar level gekomen, aan mij zal het nu niet liggen.

    Allen een goede Crucell week toegewenst en hup kato met de koers, omhoog dus.

    Gegroet Soldaat, in de tweede rust!

  20. [verwijderd] 12 maart 2006 22:14
    Hans Igor schreef:

    Flosz en Psycho, waarom denken jullie dat mijn tandarts onlangs failliet is gegaan? Maar er is nog meer:

    Levensgenieters opgelet. Wie lang en gezond wil leven, doet er goed aan regelmatig pure chocolade te eten en veel rode wijn te drinken. Een reep chocolade doet ongeveer evenveel goed als een stronk broccoli. De chocolade moet alleen wel puur zijn, géén melk.
    Het is een doktersadvies om van te dromen. Hoge bloeddruk? Hier, eet wat chocolade. U wilt gezonder leven? Kom, neem een wijntje.
    Toch is dat ongeveer de indruk die achterblijft, nu niet minder dan drie onderzoeksteams onafhankelijk van elkaar ontdekken dat pure chocolade en rode wijn tjokvol zitten met heilzame stoffen. Pure chocolade en wijn zouden de kans op hart- en vaatziekten en op kanker flink moeten verkleinen.
    -------------------------------------------

    Voor wat betreft de pure chocolade zijn er wel begrenzingen:
    Het is aan te raden om pure chocolade te eten die 70 % of meer cacao bevat.
    En ik moet zeggen dat ik die al meer dan een jaar elke dag eet. Met name de combinatie met een goeie koffie bevalt mij uitstekend.

    Giraf

1.189 Posts
Pagina: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 60 »» | Laatste |Omhoog ↑

Direct naar Forum

Indices

AEX 874,24 -1,11%
EUR/USD 1,0630 +0,04%
FTSE 100 7.822,39 -1,80%
Germany40^ 17.745,60 -1,56%
Gold spot 2.385,66 +0,11%
NY-Nasdaq Composite 15.885,02 -1,79%

Stijgers

Avantium
+4,72%
FASTNED
+2,48%
DSM FI...
+1,39%
Arcadis
+1,19%
Air Fr...
+1,11%

Dalers

Arcelo...
-6,90%
Aperam
-6,33%
JUST E...
-4,33%
SBM Of...
-4,10%
ALLFUN...
-3,62%

Lees verder op het IEX netwerk Let op: Artikelen linken naar andere sites

Gesponsorde links

Meld u aan voor de dagelijkse Beursupdate

Dagelijks een update van het laatste beursnieuws en beleggingskansen in uw mailbox!