HOUSTON? We have a Problem

[bilbao58]

Originally Posted by mhays

For actual NIH stats from 2024 and recent years, use this tool (pick a year, sort by dollars, then sort by state--that'll let you page down and see clear comparisons). Boston and SF are far ahead. Houston is in the peloton.

I already saw that tool. I’m afraid I’d have to care a lot more than I actually do to slog through all that. From looking at that tool, though, I can say that Houston has by far the highest funding (two-and-a-half times that of the next highest city, Dallas) in the number 6 state for funding. For whatever that is worth.

[DCReid]

While all metros have med facilities to serve their population, some metros have more prominent med centers that have national and international scope. TMC is one, as is Cleveland's Clinic and Rochester's Mayo Clinic. So if much of the local economy struggled, such as being overly concentrated in an industry, these centers can buttress the metro. That being said, they cannot reverse the fortunes of the metro, as Cleveland is struggling despite its excellent Cleveland Clinic. Another weakness of Houston and Cleveland, is despite their excellent medical centers, both cities are struggling to attract the biotech industries that could go well with the med ecosystems. Boston, SF, San Diego, DC and the Research Triangle of NC have done a much better job attracting the biotech and pharmas to complement their med ecosystems.

[Trae]

Originally Posted by DCReid

While all metros have med facilities to serve their population, some metros have more prominent med centers that have national and international scope. TMC is one, as is Cleveland's Clinic and Rochester's Mayo Clinic. So if much of the local economy struggled, such as being overly concentrated in an industry, these centers can buttress the metro. That being said, they cannot reverse the fortunes of the metro, as Cleveland is struggling despite its excellent Cleveland Clinic. Another weakness of Houston and Cleveland, is despite their excellent medical centers, both cities are struggling to attract the biotech industries that could go well with the med ecosystems. Boston, SF, San Diego, DC and the Research Triangle of NC have done a much better job attracting the biotech and pharmas to complement their med ecosystems.

TMC3 will fix some of that biotech funding. Houston is having and will have an easier time attracting those dollars than Cleveland

[mrnyc]

Originally Posted by Trae

TMC3 will fix some of that biotech funding. Houston is having and will have an easier time attracting those dollars than Cleveland

houston is 12th and cle is 20th in current biotech funding.

although it could always do much better and should given the prestige of the cle clinic, nevertheless, cranes are up everywhere around the campus area and cle is doing just fine in attracting biotech business.

even one of the poorest and most troubled communities in the usa, suburban east cle, is getting in on it lately, which to me is just beyond belief, but irl not so given proximity to the clinic campus and university circle neighborhood:



East Cleveland biotech project could bring more than 100 jobs to the Circle East district

A long-vacant building on Euclid Avenue is set to become a shared workspace for scientists. It's the first phase of an ambitious redevelopment called Circle East.


more:
https://www.news5cleveland.com/news/...-east-district