Stefan, thank you so much for joining me today to
talk about Breakthrough Science.
It's a pleasure to be here.
So, you at Bayer, more specifically your impact investment
arm LEAPS has launched the study together with BCG to look at how public sentiment
across the world looks at science and technology and specifically a number of
the very forward-looking forefront technologies that you're also active in.
So, we surveyed 13,000 people, and one of the most surprising findings
was the overwhelming optimism, across all countries,
about the promise and potential of science and technology to improve
individuals' futures.
75% of of respondents said that.
So, what motivated you at Bayer to start such
an effort and do research into that topic?
First and foremost, we're a science-based company and we live
in a world where the progress in science has never been as fast as it has been
today.
So, there is no better moment in history than
actually to engage into these new technologies.
So, we ask people about their perceptions on
a whole range of new technologies, cell and gene and in healthcare in terms
of therapeutics.
We ask about AI in healthcare and how that can change healthcare delivery.
We're also asked about cultured meat and new genomic techniques in, in agriculture.
Overall, it's a lot easier for people to feel
optimistic about cell and gene and in therapeutics than about a couple of the
others.
But even on new genomic technologies in agriculture,
over 50% of respondents in both developed and developed nations were positive in
general.
And then as soon as people thought about the benefits in terms of more climate
resistant crops fighting world hunger, actually that support went up a lot.
So, what do you conclude from that for the
business opportunity, but also for the dialogue you'd like to
happen in in the public arena?
First of all, I do see that across a wide array of
people in society, there's more support for these
technologies, including policy makers.
There's also a better information.
And that's something that we also owe to the public about what these technologies
can do and also dispel some of the myths, negative myths that surround them.
If we come back to healthcare and cell and gene therapies and healthcare,
one of the questions we asked people was we know these are technologies that are
costly to develop.
They, they will be expensive.
They will be not accessible for a big part of the population at first.
Yet 60% of respondents were still very supportive because they felt that is what
it, what it's going to take to advance the
science.
How do you look at that in some of our forefront technologies in our industry?
Is inequality of access unavoidable or how do you see that develop?
I think, I think we need to think about modalities
of payment in, in different access schemes and there are
solutions to this because when you have a one shot therapy that actually solves a
problem, instead of going into chronic therapies
where you have to pay for years and years, including all the costs of care that are
associated to that.
We have to look at a total cost and we need to come up with modalities to
actually finance these novel therapies.
So, it's not about spending more, it's actually about becoming more
efficient in the way how we provide care.
Stefan, thank you so much for joining me today
here.
You're welcome.