MAVA Rings Bell to Open NYSE

Congratulations to Julia Spicer and her team at the Mid-Atlantic Venture Association (MAVA) for orchestrating the opportunity to open trading at the New York Stock Exchange. Here are the details...

Leaders from the Mid-Atlantic Venture Association (MAVA) and the entrepreneurial community gathered on the iconic stage above the New York Stock Exchange and rang The Opening BellSM today.

Representatives from MAVA member funds and guests, including Updata Partners, New Enterprise Associates, H.I.G. Ventures, Boulder Ventures, The Carlyle Group, Core Capital Partners, ABS Capital Partners, In-Q-Tel, Paladin Capital Group, Avansis Ventures, The Grosvenor Funds, Montague Newhall Associates, and Safeguard Scientifics and others, attended the bell-ringing and related events at the New York Stock Exchange to promote the vital role of venture capital and private equity in the capital markets and to celebrate MAVA’s more than two decades of leadership in the venture capital industry. In May, the NYSE Euronext was a sponsor of MAVA’s Capital Connection 2008 conference in support of mid-Atlantic venture capitalists and entrepreneurs.

Following the ceremonial bell-ringing, MAVA Board President John Burton, who is also Managing General Partner of Updata Partners, provided a perspective to the viewers of CNBC’s live broadcast from the Exchange, Squawk on the Street.

Burton’s remarks on the broadcast reflected the findings of MAVA’s recent member survey on the current state of the markets as well as highlights from last week’s Mid-Atlantic Bio conference, which boasted record attendance and highlighted the vitality of the global bioscience marketplace.

“The Mid-Atlantic Venture Association has been honored to ring The Opening Bell today. Venture is essential to economic growth, now more than ever as a catalyst for innovation and jobs. We are here at a pivotal time, and there is no question the economy and our industry are facing challenges. But we are seeing that not every fund and every sector has the same challenges to the same degree. For example, biotechnology has an inherently longer cycle from genesis to liquidity, which mitigates the extended time to exit that the economy is imposing on our industry as a whole,” Burton said. “The current financial crisis is serious, there is no doubt, but our funds, whether focusing on information technology or other areas, are telling us that deals are being done, and their portfolio companies are continuing to mature and evolve to meet the needs of their market niches.”

NYT: Runway for Biotech Funding Dangerously Short

Scary article from the NYT on the financial crisis in the biotech industry...

October 29, 2008
Broader Financial Turmoil Threatens Biotech’s Innovation and Cash
By ANDREW POLLACK

So many biotechnology companies talk about “extending the runway” these days, you might think they had entered the airline business.

But for them, runway refers to the time before a company runs out of money. And with financial markets in turmoil, the runways are looking dangerously short for many small biotechnology companies. A biotech crash, if it comes, could threaten an industry that plays a vital role in turning scientific advances into usable medicines.

“If you imagine a plane falling slowly to earth, the financial crisis just tipped the nose straight down,” said Andrew Baum, chief executive of SemBioSys Genetics in Calgary, Alberta, whose stock trades on the Toronto exchange.

SemBioSys, which hopes to use genetically engineered safflowers as a low-cost way to produce insulin and other drugs, said last week it would cut about 30 workers, or more than 40 percent of its work force. Even so, the company’s cash might last only until the middle of next year, Mr. Baum said.

Many other biotechnology companies are starting to cut their work forces and even eliminate research and drug development projects in a desperate effort to extend the runway. Some might have to sell themselves at a bargain price, like Avalon Pharmaceuticals did Tuesday to Clinical Data for $10 million in stock.

The problem is that newly risk-averse investors are shunning biotechnology stocks, which are among the riskiest investments around, because most experimental drugs fail.

Biotech companies accounted for 86, or 25 percent, of the 344 companies that, as of Oct. 9, were in danger of being delisted by Nasdaq because their share price was less than $1 or they failed to have an adequate market valuation.

One of those is DeCode Genetics, which has regularly made headlines for discovering genes linked to cancer, heart attacks and numerous other diseases. The company’s stock has fallen more than 90 percent in the last year to 29 cents a share.

Investors apparently are concerned that the company’s cash is running low and that it will have trouble paying a $230 million debt that comes due in 2011. It has not helped that DeCode is based in Iceland, which has suffered a financial collapse, and that it lost millions of dollars on investments in auction rate securities. The company is now planning to sell certain operations.

There are exceptions, of course. The big biotechnology companies, including Genentech and Amgen, have products on the market and are highly profitable. The biggest companies are in such strong financial shape, in fact, that their shares are roughly flat for the year, far better than stocks as a whole.

But most biotechnology companies — several hundred publicly traded ones and thousands more in private hands — are unprofitable and can sustain themselves only with periodic infusions of cash from willing investors or pharmaceutical companies. It can take hundreds of millions of dollars and 10 years or longer to bring a drug to market.

“For a biotech company, cash is a raw material,” said George Milstein, head of investment banking at Pacific Growth Equities, an investment bank specializing in health care.

Some 113 biotechnology companies, up from 68 in the first quarter, now have less than a year of cash at their current spending rates, according to Rodman & Renshaw, an investment bank. That is about one-third of the publicly traded biotech companies it tracks.

Lack of access to credit is not the main problem for small biotechnology companies, which are considered so risky that even in boom times they cannot borrow much money from banks.

Some, though, have issued securities convertible into common stock, which might have to be paid back in cash if the stock price falls below the conversion rate.

That happened to AtheroGenics after its drug for heart disease failed in a clinical trial. Paying off $30.5 million in notes that came due in September would have left it with little cash to test its drug as a treatment for diabetes. So it defaulted, entered bankruptcy and is now trying to sell itself or the drug.

For biotechnology companies, though, the main impact of the credit crisis involves the broader market. Some hedge funds have pulled out of biotechnology investing, while others have had to sell shares to cover losses elsewhere or to return money to their investors.

To be sure, the industry has been through funding droughts before, such as in 1998 and again in 2002, and most companies survive.

But this crisis comes as other factors were already souring investors on biotechnology. Drug development has become longer and more costly, in part because the Food and Drug Administration has become more demanding. And there is more pressure to cut drug prices.

So far this year, public and private biotechnology companies have raised $5.6 billion, according to the publishing company FDC-Windhover’s Strategic Transactions database. That is only one-third the amount in all of 2007 and likely to be the lowest amount since 2002.

It has been virtually impossible for biotech companies to go public this year. That deprives venture capitalists, who help start and nurture small companies, of one of the main ways of realizing a return on their investment. And it means they have to keep financing their companies longer. Those factors — plus the fact that some venture capitalists are investing in publicly traded biotechnology companies because their shares have become so cheap — mean there will be less money left for starting new companies.

When investors do invest, they are more often insisting on quick returns. Robert I. Blum, chief executive of Cytokinetics, a publicly traded company based in South San Francisco, Calif., said hedge funds had constantly pressed him to spend money only on the company’s drugs that were already in clinical trials and to abandon earlier-stage research aimed at finding new drugs.

“They were challenging us and critiquing us for still investing in research,” Mr. Blum said. He said such pressure threatened to dry up innovation.

Cytokinetics partially bowed to the pressure in September, cutting some of its early research and dismissing 45 employees, or 29 percent of its work force.

As a company’s cash and stock price diminish, raising money becomes even harder. Companies do not like to sell new stock cheaply because it dilutes existing shareholders. And potential new investors, sensing a company is desperate, drive a harder bargain. So do pharmaceutical companies, which are desperate for new drugs and have the cash to buy smaller biotechnology companies.

“I have a sense that Big Pharma is sitting on the sidelines waiting for them to hit bottom,” said Dennis Purcell, senior managing partner of Aisling Capital, a life-sciences investment firm.

Fund-raising would also get harder if Nasdaq carried through on its threat to delist biotech companies that have become penny stocks. But with so many companies in various industries in trouble, Nasdaq has now suspended enforcement of its delisting rules for three months, until Jan. 19.

Some companies are managing to get money. Phenomix, a San Diego company, put off trying to go public but licensed a diabetes drug to Forest Laboratories for an initial payment of $75 million. Ista Pharmaceuticals of Irvine, Calif., got a $65 million credit line from Deerfield Management and two other shareholders.

But risk aversion is spreading even to some companies not in immediate danger of running out of cash.

Despite having about $200 million on hand, Maxygen last week suspended work on its lead drug — aimed at protecting cancer chemotherapy patients from infections — rather than commit $100 million or so to move the drug through clinical trials. The company, based in Redwood City, Calif., said it would reduce its work force by 30 percent and would explore selling itself.

Russell Howard, the chief executive, said the company’s market valuation was only about $130 million. That is less than its cash on hand, meaning investors were placing no value on the drug or any of the company’s other programs.

“Why would you be investing more in this business,” he said, “if the market doesn’t care?”

Mid-Atlantic Bio a "Premier Regional Bioscience Conference"

From the Frederick News-Post
http://www.fredericknewspost.com/sections/business/display.htm?StoryID=81907

Balog's Biotech — Mid-Atlantic Bio 2008
Originally published October 26, 2008


By Jason E. Balog

While most national and international conferences for the bioscience industry occur in the spring and summer, over the past several years the industry has seen the proliferation of a number of regional conferences that primarily occur in the fall and early winter. These smaller regional gatherings have become a great way for a local region to showcase and celebrate its bioscience industry and help create excitement in the local community.

The Mid-Atlantic region is lucky to have what has quickly become recognized as one of the best local conferences, drawing heavy attendance from the local bioscience community as well as from outside the region. Earlier this week (Oct. 22 through Oct. 24), the local bioscience community gathered at the Westfields Marriott Conference Center in Chantilly, Va., for the latest installment of Mid-Atlantic Bio.

Mid-Atlantic Bio is the Maryland, Virginia and Washington regions' annual bioscience conference, co-hosted by the Mid-Atlantic Venture Association, the Virginia Biotechnology Association and the Tech Council of Maryland/MdBio. Mid-Atlantic Bio was created four years ago and was hosted in Washington for its first two years before moving to Bethesda last year and Virginia this year.

In its short history, Mid-Atlantic Bio has quickly gained recognition as a substantive, regionally hosted forum and a popular place for members of the local bioscience industry to gather.

Along with numerous marketing and networking opportunities, Mid-Atlantic Bio is composed of three major components. First, attendees are presented with the opportunity to hear from leaders in the bioscience industry about innovations and advances in the industry. These opportunities range from breakout sessions focused on specific topics to keynote speakers addressing regional and industry wide topics. Some of the notable speakers at this year's conference included Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine, Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Andrew von Eschenbach, and former President and Chief Executive Officer of MedImmune David Mott.

Mid-Atlantic Bio also presents investors the opportunity to learn about the initiatives of individual bioscience companies and research organizations through in-depth company presentations. Of the numerous companies that requested an opportunity to present at this year's conference, 26 companies were selected for two tracks. Ten later-stage growth companies were selected to present as part of the Showcase track. The showcase companies were all established, funded companies representing some of the brightest technologies and companies in the region.

Sixteen emerging companies also were selected to present as part of the Growth Watch track. These companies represented a wide spectrum of early-stage companies all with one primary goal in mind: to find a funding source from the numerous venture capitalists, angel investors and other qualified financing sources in attendance. The presentations are always a highlight of Mid-Atlantic Bio and showcase the cutting-edge technology being developed in the region.

Finally, Mid-Atlantic Bio presents exhibitors a chance to showcase their capabilities and offerings in the lively exhibitor hall. Exhibiting companies generally represent the backbone of the local bioscience community and include local universities and research institutions, business development agencies and a wide range of service providers among others. As in the past, the exhibitor hall at this year's Mid-Atlantic Bio was the place where relationships were forged and deals were struck, again making it the place to be at this year's conference.

What has set Mid-Atlantic Bio apart from other regional conferences has been the successful mix of informative speakers, exciting company presentations and lively exhibition space. Mix these elements together in a location that is in the heart of one of the most vibrant bioscience hubs in the country and you instantly have the ingredients for success. As a result, Mid-Atlantic Bio has quickly become one of the premier regional bioscience events in the country. Next November, Mid-Atlantic Bio returns to Washington for its fifth anniversary at the Walter E. Washington Convention Center, and organizers are already anticipating the largest and most successful event yet.

Jason E. Balog is a principal in the law firm, Miles & Stockbridge, and leads its life sciences, biotechnology and pharmaceutical practice group. For information, please visit www.milesstockbridge.com.

Mid-Atlantic Bioscience Companies See Crisis as Severe, But Survivable

2008 Mid-Atlantic Bio today announced that respondents to a pre-conference survey acknowledged the severity of the global credit crisis in affecting bioscience companies in the mid-Atlantic region, but believe it can be weathered with appropriate planning. 2008 Mid-Atlantic Bio will take place October 22-24 in Chantilly, Va. Dedicated to promoting the growth of biotechnology in the Mid-Atlantic region, 2008 Mid-Atlantic Bio is sponsored collectively by the mid-Atlantic’s most influential bioscience and investor associations, Mid-Atlantic Venture Association (MAVA), Tech Council of Maryland/MdBio (TCM/MdBio), and the Virginia Biotechnology Association (VaBIO). The conference attracts more than 700 senior executives from the life sciences industry, as well as investors, financiers, capital sources, international delegations, attorneys, service providers, and consultants.

In today’s declining economic climate, respondents said that obtaining adequate early stage, or A Round, funding is the biggest challenge to developing a bioscience company in the Mid-Atlantic region today. Access to adequate angel funding was also cited as a significant challenge.

“More than 90 percent of respondents believe the current state of the economy is serious and will significantly impact their enterprise, but that it is survivable and will ultimately rebound,” said Douglas A. Doerfler, conference steering committee chairman and president and chief executive officer of MaxCyte, Inc. “Our companies are taking the current decline very seriously and responding with swift and certain actions. This week’s meeting brings our life sciences community together to focus on these critical issues,” he added.

The poll showed that companies plan to survive the turmoil by looking for alternative forms of revenue while managing expenses, collaborating and more aggressively pursuing partnering opportunities, and aggressively pursuing private equity investment.

Respondents also foresee considerable merger and acquisition activity ahead involving life sciences companies and large pharmaceutical firms. When asked what they believed would likely be the ultimate outcome for a biotechnology company in the Mid-Atlantic today, two out of three predicted acquisition by “Big Pharma,” while only one in five believed companies of like sizes would merge. The remainder predicted companies would grow stand alone, independent companies with marketed products.

Respondents were also asked about one of the most hotly discussed topics in the biotech industry today - “follow-on” biologics, also known as “biosimilars” or “generic biologics,” which are under consideration by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Two thirds of respondents viewed FDA approval of a pathway for these products to be positive for the biotech industry.

“The survey results suggest that a majority of the biotech industry would view FDA approval of follow-on biologics as a positive development, observed Natasha Leskovsek, a partner with Cooley Godward Kronish LLP, and moderator of a Follow-on Biologics panel taking place at the conference on October 23. “Particularly in the current economic climate, a market with more participants may increase patient access and stimulate overall demand and further innovation, while ensuring adequate protections for innovator companies,” she said.

UVA Spinout Catena Pharmacueticals Licenses GPCR Tech from School

Catena Pharmaceuticals said this week that it has obtained a worldwide, exclusive license to intellectual property surrounding anti-angiogenic G-protein coupled receptor antagonists from the University of Virginia Patent Foundation.

The licensing agreement covers multiple patents and patent applications covering GPCR chemistries and methods discovered by UVA researchers Kevin Lynch and Timothy Macdonald.

Lynch and Macdonald identified antagonists of a subset of GPCRs specific for lysophosphatidic acid, an angiogenic molecule that promotes tumor growth. Autotaxin, the enzyme that manufactures LPA, is a recognized oncogenic protein.

Financial terms of the licensing deal were not disclosed.

Catena, which recently spun out of the university, also said that it has received an undisclosed amount of seed financing from Golden Pine Ventures to support product development at the company.

Ian Mehr, managing director of Golden Pine Ventures, will serve as president and director of Catena. Lynch and Macdonald will serve as vice president of biological sciences and vice president of chemical sciences, respectively, and will sit on Catena’s board.

From Biotech Transfer Week

New HHMI President Wins Nobel Prize

Roger Tsien Wins 2008 Nobel Prize in Chemistry

The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences announced this morning
that the 2008 Nobel Prize in Chemistry was awarded to Roger
Y. Tsien, a Howard Hughes Medical Institute investigator at
the University of California, San Diego (UCSD), Osamu
Shimomura of the Marine Biological Laboratory, and Martin
Chalfie of Columbia University. The three were honored for
“the discovery and development of the green fluorescent
protein, GFP.”

For more background on Roger Tsien's research, including an
extensive biographical profile of Tsien, please visit the
HHMI web site at www.hhmi.org.

To read the full story, go to http://www.hhmi.org/news/nobel20081008.html

Wyeth Consolidation: Only 61 Jobs Cut in Richmond

By JOHN REID BLACKWELL
TIMES-DISPATCH STAFF WRITER
Pharmaceuticals maker Wyeth said yesterday that it will consolidate its East Coast distribution centers next year, costing 61 jobs at the company's distribution site in Henrico County.

The Madison, N.J.-based company plans to move its consumer health-care products distribution from the local site at 2300 Darbytown Road to a larger plant in Knoxville, Tenn., that also serves the East Coast.

About 70 employees will continue to work at the local site, a 286,000-squarefoot building, in support functions such as quality assurance and a call center, Wyeth spokesman Rob Norman said. "This just impacts the logistical services group at the facility," he said. "Wyeth does not intend to sell the facility," Norman said. "However, the company is in the process of determining the best use of the space that will become available."

The logistical operations will be phased out starting in January and close by May, he said. The company said it would provide severance, extended benefits and outplacement help to affected employees.

Norman said the change will not affect Wyeth's other local operations, including its manufacturing plant at 2248 Darbytown Road that makes consumer health products such as ChapStick, Robitussin and Preparation H. The company has about 1,200 employees in the Richmond area.

Moving the local operations to Knoxville will improve the efficiency of Wyeth's U.S. distribution network, the company said.

The Henrico site distributes consumer health products in 14 Eastern states, including Virginia, and its volume accounts for about 30 percent of the company's annual sales.

The Knoxville center, which also distributes other pharmaceutical products, is 600,000 square feet and has the capacity to serve all of the company's East Coast customers, the company said. Wyeth has a West Coast distribution center in Sparks, Nev.

In July, Wyeth said it would close its administrative office at 1407 Cummings Drive, just off Interstate 95 in Richmond, and move those offices to its nearby product-development center at 1211 Sherwood Ave. by early next year.

Richmond Times Dispatch...

SSTI: How are Immigrant Workers Changing the Face of U.S. Innovation?

From SSTI:

Recent Research: How are Immigrant and Ethnic Workers Changing the Face of U.S. Innovation?
Foreign-born and ethnic workers continue to rapidly grow in their importance to the U.S. innovation economy, according to two recent studies that address this issue by examining the links between these groups and patenting activity.

In How Much Does Immigration Boost Innovation?, Jennifer Hunt uses state panel data from 1950 to 2000 to measure the extent of immigration's impact on U.S. patenting, state innovation economies and the science and technology workforce. Foreign-born residents account for just over ten percent of the working population, but represent about 25 percent of the science and engineering workforce. The 2003 Survey of College Graduates found that immigrants patent at double the rate of native U.S. residents. That study found that the difference was attributable to disproportionate educational attainment in science and engineering.

Hunt finds that a 1.3 percent increase in the share of the population composed of immigrant college graduates can increase patenting per capita by between 10 and 26 percent. Post-college immigrants had an even larger positive impact. In addition, immigrant college graduates can have positive spillovers for the non-immigrant population. While there may be some short-term crowding out of the native population as immigrants arrive, in the long-term, there is evidence that post-college immigrants can increase the patenting activity of their native neighbors.

Overall, Hunt argues that an immigrant college graduate contributes at least twice as much to patenting as a native counterpart.

Purchase How Much Does Immigration Boost Innovation? from the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) at: http://www.nber.org/papers/w14312.pdf

BIO's CEO on Global Credit Crisis

The Financial Crisis and Biotechnology

October 3, 2008


This week we want to take some time on our Web site to focus on the profound impact the financial crisis has had on biotechnology companies.

Biotechnology companies are highly dependent on well functioning capital markets to finance their development projects since many will not see revenue for perhaps a decade.

It generally takes approximately $1 billion, including the cost of failures, to get a new therapy to market. This financing generally comes in the form of equity investment.

When credit markets seize up, as we've seen in the past 13 months, there is less capital available for investors to put at risk, and the capital that is put at risk is dedicated to shorter term, lower risk options. So while some areas of the economy have seen a slowdown, biotech has seen a near-freeze.

This means that our companies - especially our public companies - are in a very precarious situation: they must continue on their development projects, but are unable to attain additional financing from investors. As a result, many of the 300-400 public biotech companies are trading at very low levels, and many are operating with less than one year's cash remaining.

If credit markets don't open up, it's possible that the biotechnology industry may go through a considerable consolidation or shake out during the next year. The result? Companies with promising therapies may not be able to continue their work, delaying the availability of new options for patients.

We recognize this difficult climate for our industry. As Congress moves beyond the current crisis, we will work with members of Congress and the administration to develop a series of legislative and policy remedies that will help improve the investment climate and reduce administrative burdens. These initiatives include provisions to shore-up companies' balance sheets and incentives to attract and retain investment in our industry.

We will work with allies across numerous industries - those innovative industries similar to ours - as well as new partners to develop these initiatives and urge Congress for action.

Jim Greenwood
President and CEO
Biotechnology Industry Organization, BIO

Over 72 turn out for inaugural Hampton Roads Luncheon

From Hampton Roads Bioscience Luncheon

Thank you to everyone who came to the inaugural Hampton Roads Bioscience Luncheon for making it a huge success. It was a full house with over 72 people attending to hear The Honorable Philip A. Hamilton from the Virginia House of Delegates, and Dr. William Wasilenko of Eastern Virginia Medical School speak. You can view photos of the event on our website.

Boots Centre for Innovation-- Call for Proposals

Boots Centre for Innovation (BCI) - www.bootsinnovation.com - has been established to work closely with early stage companies or inventors to develop pioneering products for the shelves of Alliance Boots stores that will improve the quality of life for consumers across Europe.

Alliance Boots is a leading pharmacy, health and beauty company with a retail network of 2,400 Boots stores in the UK, and access to 100,000 pharmacies across Europe.

Call for Proposals
We will be seeking proposal submissions of products and technologies that may be of interest to Alliance Boots in their 10 consumer focus areas:

1. Improve ways to diagnose, treat and monitor key aspects of health, beauty and wellbeing through use of devices
2. Support positive ageing through products and devices for mind and body
3. Minimize the complications of living with chronic conditions
4. Improve digestive health, particularly issues related to stress, poor diet and obesity
5. Improve and maintain the health, look and feel of skin
6. Minimize the severity and duration of pain
7. Improve quality of sleep for everyone, including pregnant women, babies and the elderly
8. Create more convenient methods of taking and using medicines and health products
9. Improve the health and appearance of teeth and gums
10. Improve the health, appearance and comfort of eyes

This is an excellent opportunity to have your technology or product potentially developed and sold through the vast Alliance Boots retail network.

New Product Innovation Seminar & Direct Interviews
BCI will also be hosting a New Product Innovation Seminar in Boston in early December, which will allow selected companies to understand how to access Boots with new ideas and how to work with them in partnership to bring ideas to the shelf across Europe.

Do you have a product concept or idea that you would like to submit to Boots Centre for Innovation?

Please complete the Boots Centre for Innovation Questionnaire by clicking here - www.bootsinnovation.com/bostonevent.html

Proposal Deadline
The deadline for submission of proposals is October 30th 2008.

Additional Information
Please contact Louise Bryce - Tel: 011 44 1792 602 673, or email info@bootsinnovation.com

David Mott Video: Join Me at Mid-Atlantic Bio

David Mott, General Partner, New Enterprise Associates and former CEO, MedImmune Inc. invites you to join him at Mid-Atlantic Bio on October 22-24, 2008 at the Westfields Marriott/Washington Dulles. www.midatlanticbio.org

Academy to help train VA students in agriculture

From www.americanfarm.com
9.23.2008By Jane W. GrahamAFP Correspondent

HALIFAX, Va. — Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine joined in the excitement Sept. 10 to cut the ribbon, opening the Governor’s Career and Technical Academy for Renewable Resources and Agricultural Sciences. The academy, one of eight in the county, is designed for pre-K-12 students, said Melanie Stanley, director of academies for the Halifax County School System. Stanley said she is excited about the academy, which she expects to enable county students to become part of the its agricultural industry as adults.

Stanley is a county native who left and came back when she was needed to help with her family’s business after her mother was injured. She stayed and surprised herself by joining the school system. She said that Halifax is a rural county in southern Virginia with approximately 6,000 public school students. About 1,800 of these are in high school. While the county is located in the state’s dwindling tobacco belt, forestry is its largest industry, Stanley said.

The county’s academy approach to education is different from magnet schools, Stanley said. There is no need to apply; the doors are open to all students who want to attend. The academies offer dual enrollment college level courses, she added. Stanley said the renewable resources and agricultural academy looks at agriculture sciences from several different viewpoints. She is developing four programs of study for the high school students. They are horticulture, pre-veterinary, biotechnology and renewable resources. The programs are being designed to meet the needs that have been identified through community participation.

Business partnerships and grants play important parts in the schools, she said. Examples of community participation include the Lowe’s Equine Center at the county fairgrounds that belongs to the school system and a 128-acre farm willed to the schools by the late Hula Moorefield. He stipulated that it be used to enhance agricultural sciences.

In outlining the four programs of study for high school students, Stanley said that each tries to teach a variety of skills and business practices that will help students work in the agricultural industry. The horticulture program offers the study of floriculture. Students work with plants in the high school’s greenhouse, learning how to care for plants, how to run a greenhouse and how to run a business. The pre-vet course of study is dealing with horse management this year. The barn at the fairgrounds is home to this program. She said she believes Halifax County is the only school system in the state to have its own equine barn. It is equipped with an interactive classroom that lets students learn with hands-on projects. Stanley said she is looking forward to adding small and large animal veterinary sciences to the curriculum in the coming year.

The biotechnology program will be a study of biological application. In 2009, Stanley said the program will be doing a lot in aquaculture, a need that has been identified locally. Students will be learning how to earn a livelihood in this field. The program of study may incorporate some catfish farming in the students’ schedules. The fourth course of study is in renewable resources. Its topics will include forestry and biofuels. Among the hands-on activities the students can expect is making biofuels. They will also be looking at forest mensuration, including harvesting and logging. This program will have help from WoodLINKS, an industry education partnership. In this part of the plan of study, students move from how to take rough cut lumber to making furniture, to using both hands-on methods and computerized machines, to marketing, and on to packaging and shipping. Stanley said this program will help give them tools with which to work, including math, finance and marketing capabilities. She said she hopes it will help them to begin to understand and see all aspects of the industry. Not every student can excel in hand scraping a chair seat, she said, but one might be able to market the product.

The program is trying to teach values and give the students a feeling of ownership for what they have created. The county’s students become involved in the program before high school with the younger students going on field trips and seeing what the older students do. In middle school, the students can take an introduction to agricultural science that includes some of the same components that are in the high school courses. A greenhouse is being constructed at the middle school to further this project. It is an indication that the academy is a work in progress.

VaBIO Members Tour Wyeth

 Members of VaBIO enjoyed a private tour of the Wyeth Consumer Healthcare manufacturing facility in Richmond on September 17th. More than 700 work at this advanced manufacturing facility that produces more than a dozen Wyeth products. This exclusive event was sponsored by Latimer, Mayberry & Matthews IP Law, LLP and open to VaBIO members only.

Wyeth, ranked 113th on the Fortune 500 list, is one of the world’s largest research-driven pharmaceutical and health care products companies. They employ more than 50,000 worldwide. It is a leader in the discovery, development, manufacturing and marketing of pharmaceuticals, vaccines, biotechnology products, nutritionals and non-prescription medicines that improve the quality of life for people worldwide. The company’s major divisions include Wyeth Pharmaceuticals, Wyeth Consumer Healthcare and Fort Dodge Animal Health.

The next Virginia Biotechnology Association bioscience facilities tour is scheduled for October 14 in Charlottesville, Virginia. The tour, open exclusively to VaBIO members, includes tours of two emerging biotech companies, conveniently located in the same building. For details, please visit http://www.vabio.org/category/events/.

Job Posting: UVA Clinical and Translational Research Program Director

UVA Clinical and Translational Research Program Director

The University of Virginia School of Medicine seeks a manager with experience in biomedical technology and business to join an exciting new program for enhancing clinical impact of medical discoveries through promotion of clinical and translational research and facilitation of the transfer of innovative intellectual properties from University laboratories to commercial practice. Details about position responsibilities and qualifications can be found at: https://jobs.virginia.edu by searching on Position Number FP732.

To apply, complete a Candidate Profile and attach a cover letter, cv and contact information for three references. Salary will be commensurate with experience. Position is open until filled.

Contact Dr. Erik Hewlett at: EH2V@virginia.edu for further information.

The University of Virginia is an Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer.

BIOtech Now Podcast: Mark Herzog on Biotech in Virginia

From BIOtech Now:

Mark Herzog on Biotech Innovation in Virginia
Posted on September 12, 2008 by danmcgirt

BIOtech Now talks with Mark Herzog, executive director of the Virginia Biotechnology Association. Mark discusses the strengths of and recent developments in Virginia’s innovative biotech industry, as well as efforts the state is making to further accelerate the growth of the life sciences in Virginia.

With its strong research universities, advantageous location in the Mid-Atlantic, and a favorable business climate, Virginia is home to more than 175 biotechnology, equipment, pharmaceutical and medical device companies.

According to Mark, Virginia gives strong support to emerging biotech companies. One challenge that success brings is meeting the changing needs of young life science companies as they grow. Making sure Virginia’s homegrown biotech companies have access to the advanced laboratory space, trained workforce and investment capital they need to reach the next level will help ensure that Virginia remains a leader in biotech innovation.

Click here for the Podcast.

VA Business: State Support for Biotech Poor vs. Neighbors

From this month's Virginia Business Magazine.

This article, probably written about a month ago, captures the general attitudes of the state's bioscience-focused economic developers regarding the Commonwealth's history with this industry. There is guarded interest in what comes out of this Virginia General Assembly panel chaired by Delegate Mark Sickles and Senator Janet Howell.

Support for biotech pales in comparison with leading states
September 01, 2008 12:01 AM
by Robert Burke

Backers of Virginia’s biotech industry went to the 2008 BioInternational Convention in San Diego in June hoping to show off in front of thousands of companies and industry insiders. The four-day convention, which pitches itself as the world’s largest biotech event, featured elaborate exhibits from dozens of countries and 30 U.S. states.
But Virginia wasn’t among them. Gov. Timothy M. Kaine attended the event but was relegated to walking the exhibit floor and schmoozing with the masses instead of hosting guests in a Virginia pavilion. “We had nothing,” says John Avellanet, a Williamsburg consultant who attended the event.
Now in October comes the 2008 Mid-Atlantic Bio conference, a three-day event co-sponsored by the Virginia Biotechnology Association, the MdBio/Tech Council of Maryland and Mid-Atlantic Venture Association, which has offices in Northern Virginia and Maryland. This is the event’s first time in Virginia — at the Westfields Marriott in Chantilly.
The commonwealth might feel like a weak sister, though, because in many ways Maryland far outpaces Virginia. In the past six years, for example, Maryland firms garnered $1.96 billion in venture capital, compared with $193 million in Virginia over the same period, according to a report released in June by the Biotechnology Industry Association. Virginia outpaces many states in some areas — it ranked 14th in the number of bioscience-related patents during that six-year period, with 2,884 patents. But Maryland ranked seventh, with 3,680 patents. It has built a thriving, centralized biotech community on anchors such as the National Institutes of Health and Johns Hopkins University.
And in July, Gov. Martin O’Malley unveiled a $1.1 billion Bio 2020 Initiative, designed to boost the life sciences industry through tax credits, money for stem cell research and new lab and incubator space.
Don’t expect a similar plan in cash-strapped Virginia.
Mark Herzog, executive director of the Virginia Biotechnology Association (VaBio), says even modest proposals fall flat here. Three years ago a 43-member Governor’s Commission on Biotechnology, which included legislators, businesspeople and educators, recommended steps the state could take, such as funding efforts by Virginia universities to find commercial applications for bioscience discoveries. “We all spent about four years on the initiative and nothing came out of it. Not even a press release,” Herzog says.
Lackluster promotion
To Herzog and others, the state’s effort to promote its biotech sector is listless at best and is starting to hurt. “The general industry feeling seems to be that Virginia is well positioned … to be a player in the biosciences,” says Robin Sullenberger, CEO of the Shenandoah Valley Partnership, who also attended the San Diego event. “But there is some amount of confusion in regard to the political will and the commitment to invest to make that happen.”
Virginia obviously offers some significant assets. Northern Virginia has the Food and Drug Administration at its doorstep in Washington, D.C., for example, and that access is invaluable for companies trying to navigate federal regulations. Also, the Janelia Farm research campus that recently opened in Loudoun County is a one-of-a-kind facility with the potential to produce breakthroughs that could spawn new companies. Plus, there are growing biotech clusters and advanced university-based research in places such as Charlottesville, Richmond and Blacksburg.
Skeptics, though, say that’s not enough. There is intense competition among states and even nations to grab a share of the action in life sciences, and Virginia isn’t keeping up. “There are states that are already well-positioned players,” says Sullenberger, such as Maryland, Massachusetts, North Carolina and California. “I think it’s very obvious we send a mixed message.”
Part of the reason stems from the state’s generally conservative approach to spending. “Virginia tends to be relatively cautious and tends to want to see some evidence before it necessarily strikes out in a bold direction,” says Jerry Giles, director of finance with the Virginia Economic Development Partnership.
That’s not necessarily a bad thing. Massachusetts Gov. Duval Patrick proclaimed in January that his $1 billion life-sciences initiative would create 250,000 jobs in the next decade. An unrealistic goal, perhaps, since, as skeptics noted, that is twice as many jobs as the state had added from all sources in the past 10 years. So bold isn’t always beautiful.

Bottom of the list
Neither is lagging behind the pack. The June study cited 25 state-supported funds that provide seed and pre-seed investments to help biotech firms get started. Nearly all the other states on the list had multimillion-dollar funds, led by Ohio’s $263 million Third Frontier Pre-Seed Fund. Down at the bottom of the list was Virginia’s $500,000 GAP BioLife Fund, handled by the Center for Innovative Technology.
Giles responds with two points: first, the life-sciences sector overall has thus far not turned a profit, so some caution is warranted in terms of investing money. It is time-consuming and expensive to bring a discovery from the lab through the regulatory maze and to the marketplace, and the risk is substantial. Secondly, there are many factors that determine why a company succeeds and where it takes root. “The cost of doing business, the cost of living … the cost of hiring highly qualified biotechnology workers — all of that has to be factored into the equation,” he says. “There’s a lot more that goes into making a good strategic business decision than how much money the state is willing to give.”
But Herzog can tick off examples of entrepreneurs that did their research here but ended up launching the company somewhere else, lured away by venture capitalists or the availability of facilities such as wet labs, which have the plumbing and equipment to allow hands-on scientific research. Two years ago, for example, a pair of researchers at George Mason University in Fairfax County launched a company called Theranostics Health, but put it in suburban Maryland instead of Northern Virginia. VaBio, the state’s biotech industry association, this year backed legislation to use public-private partnerships to spur construction of wet lab space, a critical need for young life-science companies, but it failed. “We’ve become an incubator for other state’s biotech industries,” Herzog says. “There have not been major investments in life sciences in the past eight years, and it’s really starting to catch up to us.”
Avellanet, however, thinks the companies and the supporters of Virginia’s biotech sector are looking in the wrong direction. He is the co-author of the book “Best Practices in Biotechnology Business Development.” “There’s a lot of waiting for the government to bail them out,” he says. A better approach would be pulling together all the players and coming up with a strategy that recognizes their shared interests in building a sector with critical mass. “Anything less than a 10-year plan is just a crisis mode,” he says. “What it needs to say is, ‘Here’s the overall umbrella of biotech in Virginia, here are the components, and these are the people who need to be leading the charge.’”
Avellanet also asks why the state biotech association doesn’t try to encourage other companies to come here by getting its current members to provide discounts for the new arrivals. He worries that without a statewide initiative, parts of the state such as Northern Virginia will be pulled into other regional clusters and leave other parts of Virginia out in the cold. “Virginia has got to get its act together first and start to get some traction, and then talk to Maryland and D.C.” about creating a true multi-state life sciences cluster, he says.
Herzog notes that VaBio does help companies find the support they need to grow here, and it has group-purchasing programs to help members cut costs. “If we had better luck working with our state-policy partners, we’d feel better about what we’re doing,” he says.
Now, there’s a new chance. The General Assembly this year created the Commission on Bioscience and Biotechnology, with members from industry and the legislature. Its goal: to come up with the top three things the state should do to grow the biotech industry and craft recommendations for next year’s session. The lack of venture capital and facilities are two major issues, Herzog says, but he’ll be glad to see any substantial support. “Virginia in a lot of ways is suffering from this idea of ourselves as being the ‘best state for business,’” he says. “But we could have so much more.

UNOS Hires Richmond TV Anchor for PR & Marketing

http://www.styleweekly.com/article.asp?idarticle=17564

Congratulations, UNOS! This is a great catch.

August 20, 2008
Signing Off

After nearly a quarter-century, Channel 8 news anchor Lisa Schaffner bows out.
by Lisa Antonelli Bacon

Last Thursday was a bit weird for WRIC-TV news anchor Lisa Schaffner. As local chairwoman of the American Cancer Society’s Making Strides Against Breast Cancer walk in October, she spent the morning of Aug. 14 pumping up the crowd at the event’s kick-off breakfast. Afterward, she was feeling a little uncomfortable.

Although no one at the breakfast knew, when the walk takes place in October, she won’t be the Lisa Schaffner they chose for the job.

After 22 years at WRIC — becoming the city’s first female newscaster to anchor a 6 o’clock news broadcast in March 1991 — Schaffner is leaving broadcast journalism.

WRIC General Manager Bob Peterson says he was blindsided when Schaffner recently broke the news. “I was shocked by Lisa’s decision,” he says. “I appreciate everything Lisa has done for the years she has been here. I wish she was staying.” Peterson says Schaffner’s replacement has already been chosen, but won’t yet say who it is.

Schaffner says the tipping point was her children. Danielle, 14, starts attending James River High School in September, and Jesse, 11, heads to Robious Middle School. “I’ve never been home to put them to bed on a weekday,” Shaffner says.

Beginning Oct. 1, Schaffner will be director of public relations and marketing for the United Network for Organ Sharing, known as UNOS, a national nonprofit based in the Virginia BioTechnology Research Park downtown. As it turns out, the position was created for Schaffner when rumblings of her retirement began to circulate during the last few months.

“We created it for her because we saw the opportunity,” says its executive director, Walter Graham. “She has the ability to bring focus and attention to UNOS and its mission, particularly in the Richmond area, and to help us expand into new areas.”

For Schaffner, parting is sweet sorrow. “I love my job. I’ve done so much for myself,” she says, fighting back tears. “It’s the right decision for my children. Sometimes you have to push yourself to do things you normally wouldn’t do, but you’re doing it for all the right reasons. I have two very important reasons.”

At 46, an age she says she’s “not ashamed of,” Schaffner has spent nearly all of her career at Channel 8. When she arrived in 1986, she had only a few years of experience as a general assignment reporter for WBAY-TV in Green Bay, Wis. A visit with her brother in Leesburg impressed her. Then nature intervened.

“The next winter was the snowiest Green Bay ever had,” she recalls. “I thought it might be time to leave.” Coincidentally, there was a job opening at what was then WXEX-TV, based in Petersburg. In the 22 years since, she’s hung on as WXEX turned into WRIC and moved its base of operations to Richmond. She emerged as the face of the operation in 1991, during a tumultuous time for the station. She succeeded former anchor Kevin McGraw, who was fired because of low ratings and the station’s perennial spot as the No. 3 station, behind WWBT-12 and WTVR-6.

At the time, McGraw was allegedly having an affair with reporter Gretchen Carlson, a former Miss America, who got her start in Richmond. Carlson moved on to become co-anchor of the Saturday Early Show on CBS, and now co-anchors the nationally televised morning show, Fox & Friends.

Schaffner’s watched the station’s rankings shuffle back and forth with the competition, and survived it all. In one notorious incident, she was allegedly shoved onto a desk while trying to break up a shouting match between former co-anchor Steve Coleman and news directors in December 1992.

Schaffner became a stabilizing force at the station, and has watched the broadcast industry go through a multitude of changes. Today, local television news competes with a plethora of cable news shows and the Internet.

“When I came on board, we had a noon, a six o’clock, and an 11 o’clock broadcast. Now we have an additional two hours in the morning, an additional 4:30 broadcast and all the Internet coverage. We did live coverage, but now it’s live 24/7,” Schaffner says. “The lifespan of the story changes. When viewers see a story at 6, they think, ‘What are you going to give me at 11?’ We’re constantly trying to pull in that new information. It takes more resources and more time.”

Meanwhile, WRIC has largely taken a backseat to WWBT and anchors Sabrina Squire and Gene Cox in the echelon of local television news. While WTVR has seen anchors come and go, Schaffner has remained the face of WRIC for nearly two decades.

“She is a scrappy competitor who outlasted a lot of her competition,” says the newly retired Douglas Durden, former television critic for the Richmond Times-Dispatch. “Her perky hair and delivery have been a welcome constant through decades of change. Unlike a lot of people who were brought in to be anchors, Richmond audiences watched her evolve from reporter to anchor.”

Meanwhile, Schaffner’s lived many stages of adulthood in Richmond. “I’ve been married here, had two children here, and divorced here,” she says. And although cooking dinner was rarely on her to-do list, she did learn how to make some mean chocolate-chip cookies, which she’s looking forward to doing more often.

Her last day on the anchor desk is Sept. 15. Two weeks later, she’ll show up at UNOS, where there is no clothing allowance. Female newscasters often receive a stipend for clothing as the equivalent of celebrity models for local fashion. “Anything you saw on the air and liked, you’ll see me in again at UNOS,” she says.

Coming to terms with the change in persona weighs heavily. “People always ask if I’m nervous when I get on TV. I’m never nervous,” she says, adding the caveat: “About this, I’m nervous. It’s a big life change.

“Sometimes you need to walk away from who you are to find who you are to become. That’s where I am.”

Insmed Lands Front Page Story in WaPo

Geoff Allen and his team must be thrilled with this great coverage in today's Washington Post...

Biotech Campaigns for Easier Access to Generic Drug Market
Richmond Firm Wants Congress to Revamp FDA Approval Process
By Kendra Marr
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, August 13, 2008; D01

Geoffrey Allan has been giving Congress a lesson in biotechnology.

He's explained protein structures and how they work. He's reviewed how drugs are absorbed into the body.

If lawmakers understand the difference between chemical and biologic drugs, Allan reasons, they'll be more invested in his cause: getting quick approval for generic biotech drugs. Today the generics market for chemical drugs like aspirin is booming, but there is no way to get cheaper copies of pricey biologics, for complex life-threatening diseases like cancer, into patients' hands.

Allan, who has worked in the drug industry for 28 years, has a lot at stake. As chief executive of Insmed -- a small Richmond biotech whose goal is to be the first U.S. company to develop a portfolio of biotech generics, or "biosimilars" -- his company's success rides on Congress overhauling the laws to permit competition that would result in lower biologic drug prices.

"You have to talk to people and educate people to expand the possibilities in this field," he said.

The difference between chemical and biologic drugs lies in manufacturing. Chemical drugs are small, simple molecules. Because these drugs are made with tightly controlled chemical recipes, a lab test can easily confirm that a generic such as acetaminophen is identical to the original product Tylenol.

Biologics are much larger and more complex. Biotech companies manipulate living cells into mini-factories to produce the desired molecules for drugs. Any divergence in production processes can change the entire function of the product, potentially jeopardizing patient safety. It's impossible to create perfectly identical products -- hence the term biosimilar -- and tricky to compare divergences.

Last month, Insmed demonstrated that its version of Neupogen, which stimulates white blood cell growth, was equivalent in 32 healthy volunteers to the original product from Amgen. But, for Insmed's version, there is no pathway for approval. And some argue the process should be different than for chemical drugs.

"With a biosimilar, that's not enough," said Andrew Fox, Amgen's director of regulatory affairs. "You need to go into larger trials for safety and efficacy. Insmed's limited data appeared to be good data. However, bioequivalence testing in healthy volunteers does not provide the necessary data on how the biologic actually works in the body, which can only be determined through more extensive clinical testing in patients where safety and efficacy are evaluated."

Two decades ago, as prices for chemical drugs skyrocketed, Congress passed the Hatch-Waxman Act, which opened the doors for generic competition after patent expiration. Once a company demonstrates that its generic is chemically identical to a brand-name drug, it can use the approval of the brand-name drug as evidence that its copycat works just as well without additional human trials.

When the Hatch-Waxman Act passed, the biotech industry was young, and lawmakers didn't think to give the Food and Drug Administration an abbreviated review process to swiftly approve biosimilars. Now, escalating health-care expenditures have prompted Congress to consider one. Last year, two bills were introduced into the House and are still pending. Then, in March, representatives drafted yet another.

A recent Congressional Budget Office analysis of a Senate bill, which passed unanimously last year in committee, found that biosimilar competition would reduce expenditures on biologics by about $200 million by 2013 and about $25 billion by 2018. These savings would represent about 0.5 percent of national spending on prescription drugs, at wholesale prices, over the next decade.

The main point of contention among these bills: the length of an innovator company's "data exclusivity." Not to be confused with patents, data exclusivity is the period after the FDA approves a product during which an imitator can't rely on the innovator's clinical data for safety and effectiveness. It can run during and longer than the period of patent protection.

Insmed, along with consumer groups such as AARP and the National Organization for Rare Disorders, are lobbying for five years, the same length as chemical drug data exclusivity, to get cheaper drugs to patients sooner and spur biosimilar growth.

"These types of drugs make an enormous amount of money," Allan said regarding a longer period. "If generics come into the marketplace, it'll eradicate the monopoly. Let's be clear. This is all about protecting monopoly."

Established companies deny such a motive.

"We've always supported a pathway," said Genentech spokeswoman Megan Pace. "We just want to make sure patient safety and data protection for innovators will be a part of the bill."

Because biosimilars aren't exact duplicates of the original drugs, they don't violate the original drug's patent, enabling legal distribution before patent expiration. As a result, the Biotechnology Industry Organization, as well as the handful of biotechs that control most of the market, supports a 14-year period to allow companies to recoup their investment and conduct further clinical trials to improve the product.

"The biologics industry, even now, is largely made up of small companies that are losing money," said Sara Radcliffe, the organization's vice president of science and regulatory affairs.

And because biosimilars aren't perfect copies, patients rights groups and biotechs are asserting that patients should not be forced to take them. It is up the discretion of individual physicians, not insurance companies or pharmacies, to substitute a branded biologic for a biosimilar, they said.

Substitution has been slow in the European Union, where patients already have access to these drugs. In the first six months of introducing Omnitrope, a biosimilar growth hormone, in France, about 20 percent of new patients requiring the hormone took the biosimilar under doctors' advice, said Andreas Rummelt, chief executive of Sandoz, the generic division of Swiss drugmaker Novartis.

Last month Insmed, a spinout from the University of Virginia, brought on Bill Thomas, the former chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, to aid its lobbying as a strategic adviser. Thomas, who played a key role in creating Medicare Part D prescription drug coverage for seniors, was intrigued by the company's progress in duplicating Neupogen.

"You don't have to create hypothetical," Thomas said. "Insmed is real. You want to say yes to these people or no to these people."

Thomas said he is doing what he can to help move legislation by the end of this Congress.

"People are waiting for us to do our job," Thomas said. "If we don't, we'll be buying European or Asian products when we could be buying American products produced by Americans."

Biotech drugs are the money-makers in today's drug market. Global prescription sales of biotech drugs increased 12.5 percent in 2007 -- nearly double the rate of the overall pharmaceutical market, which includes the biotech sector -- to more than $75 billion, according to a June report by IMS Health, a health-care information company.

Neupogen generated $1.3 billion in worldwide sales last year.

Insmed certainly isn't alone. Large European pharmaceutical companies are already selling biosimilars in Europe. There are also smaller U.S. companies, such as Hospira in Lake Forest, Ill., breaking in. But the complexity of these biologics guarantees that few companies have the resources to jump into the market.

Insmed's research and development has increased, totaling $10.8 million for the first half of this year, as it continues to develop biosimilars and innovator drugs at its facility in Boulder, Colo. The company posted a loss of $9.5 million for the quarter ended June 30.

But the potential market is big. Four of the six FDA-approved drugs for multiple sclerosis are biologics. Treatment can cost a patient more than $30,000 a year, prohibiting many from obtaining drugs, said Shawn O'Neail, an associate vice president at the National MS Society.

"The bottom line is that it's a good business model," Allan said.

Firebombings at Homes of 2 California Researchers

Anti-science violence at UCSC...

August 4, 2008
Firebombings at Homes of 2 California Researchers
By JESSE McKINLEY

SANTA CRUZ, Calif. — The police and federal authorities are investigating firebombings at the homes of two researchers at the University of California, Santa Cruz.

The attacks, which the university described as “antiscience violence,” occurred nearly simultaneously before dawn on Saturday, just days after the police in Santa Cruz discovered pamphlets in a coffee shop warning of attacks against “animal abusers everywhere.” The pamphlets included the names, addresses and other personal information of several researchers at the university, according to a news release put out on Friday by the university.

About 5:30 a.m. Saturday, two small bombs ignited outside the researchers’ homes. In one of the attacks, a vehicle was destroyed in a faculty member’s driveway. At the second residence, a two-story home near the university’s front gates, the fire forced the researcher, his wife and two children to flee the home from an upstairs window. The fires were quickly extinguished.

One minor injury was reported, according to The Santa Cruz Sentinel, which also said the police were viewing the attacks as acts of attempted homicide and domestic terrorism. The Santa Cruz Police Department would not comment on their investigation on Sunday.

But the researcher whose house caught fire was identified by The Associated Press as David Feldheim, a molecular biologist, who was listed in the pamphlet. The other researcher was not identified.

The fires provoked an angry response from the university’s chancellor, who said the attacks were being investigated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, as well as by the campus police and the state fire marshal’s office.

“These unconscionable acts put the researchers, their families — including their children — and their neighbors in grave danger,” the chancellor, George R. Blumenthal, said in a news release.

The university described the attacks as the latest in a series of threats and provocations from those opposed to “biomedical research using animals,” including a February incident in which several masked intruders entered a researcher’s home. After a confrontation, the intruders fled. That incident followed harassing phone calls and vandalism of researchers’ homes, the university said.

In December, the 10 chancellors at the University of California campuses affirmed in a statement their support of animal research and the university system’s commitment to “the highest standards of animal care, safety and health.”

At one of the bombed properties, the porch was badly scorched and a plastic watering can lay melted next to the charred front door. Two small windows in the door had also melted.

The attacks surprised some in Santa Cruz, a genial beachfront town where laid-back college students and equally relaxed day-trippers make up much of the landscape.

Chris Conway, who lives across the street from one of the homes that was attacked, said investigators had combed the site all day Saturday.

“I don’t know what they did to deserve that,” said Mr. Conway, a 19-year-old student. “I think that’s kind of messed up to do that to someone’s home.”