In an ongoing effort to onshore more of the biopharma supply chain, U.S. President Donald Trump signed an executive order (EO) late May 5 to shorten the time involved in bringing a new manufacturing plant or expansion online and to remove some of the incentives for foreign production of finished drugs and active pharmaceutical ingredients.
Australian biopharma stakeholders welcomed the reelection of Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, who promised to expand Medicare and to invest more in Australian research.
Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) spoke to an industry meeting in Washington and expressed concerns about the situation at the U.S. FDA, but she also blasted the tariffs put in place by the Trump administration as lacking the proper statutory authority.
The Trump administration’s broad slash to university research budgets raises pertinent questions over impacts to the biopharma ecosystem, specifically how a changed trajectory of early research programs will affect tomorrow’s treatments and cures. Who is going to bridge research from idea to company if grants from the U.S. NIH are no longer an option?
The Trump administration’s tariff activities provoked another set of responses from both Medtech Europe and the Advanced Medical Technology Association.
The first 100 days of the Trump administration have been nothing short of chaotic, both in the U.S. and throughout the world. Shining a light through the uncertainty, BioWorld continues to cover the administration’s latest policy decisions and actions affecting the life sciences sector, as well as their impacts across the globe. It’s all right here at Trump administration impacts.
First quarter earnings reports from Edwards Lifesciences Corp., Intuitive Surgical Inc. and Boston Scientific Corp. support trends seen earlier: Larger med-tech companies expect substantial tariff hits, but also have confidence that they can absorb the impact with fairly minor adjustments.
Harvard University has filed a lawsuit claiming the Trump administration’s freezing of its federal funding is unlawful and beyond the government’s authority. Announcing the move, Harvard’s president, Alan Garber, highlighted the impact of freezing $2.2 billion in grants – and the threat to freeze a further $1.1 billion – will have on the university’s biomedical research.
On Jan. 21, economist Jay Bhattacharya spoke publicly for the first time since becoming the current NIH director, addressing the NIH Council of Councils in an open session. The goal of Bhattacharya’s remarks seemed to be to reassure troubled staffers. His reassurances, however, were given in the face of another blow to NIH research.
Harvard University has filed a lawsuit claiming the Trump administration’s freezing of its federal funding is unlawful and beyond the government’s authority. Announcing the move, Harvard’s president, Alan Garber, highlighted the impact of freezing $2.2 billion in grants – and the threat to freeze a further $1.1 billion – will have on the university’s biomedical research.
