and specifically the russian middle class .. [inaudible]

[inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] the russian they believed that they should say no russian troops in ukraine. in here the current situation ukraine was so efficient because there so many propaganda by the

west. the propaganda was with the language of world war ii the main symbol of the victory of the world war ii in 1945. and the third very important look what happened in ukraine. through the war in the battle the population has very horrific memories.

this is a very significant reason. of course russia violates what international law but the key punishment and therefore an ethical. therefore it is unethical act because russia restores its status by conducting ethical policy. it's not only people but also service of a system of protection of defense. therefore despite the fact that

one other way official media say they're only volunteers there, people are perfectly aware that russian military the volunteers were the troops fight their and this is the right thing because there were is the worst cheating in the war. >> trimmer questions but they must be very short. >> will very quickly respond to these because we are already past time. i see three handset. >> i like to ask in the context

of the if you're defined as a foreign agent. >> with american propaganda being such a cornerstone of pollutants popularity, his notion that president putin, i'm sorry president trump can make a deal to reset relations with russia fanciful. >> the last question in the back. >> so these are two questions of the we're done. >> will result or what outcome

is more positive for russia. 52% 30% said trump would be better for russian only 9% spoke about clinton. therefore the trump and prudent should be the successor putin. [inaudible] [inaudible] >> we have lost a court case.

[inaudible] clearly and politically they ordered -- not going up against the civil defense and general asking against the national memorial another of these 48 were included. >> i think it was highly -- to play a role. but this also came a number because we did not yet receive any, we earn this money for research and our partner, the commercial company they did not do anything to do with the organization of which they will

go by. the second would be the pressure in the region and environmental official throughout with our employees which blocks the opportunity to come back and conducted number of projects which we had with russian. [inaudible] another relation with the worker, another words to ask the local administration. it's not only financial and finally, we are not going to

apply to the registered and that means we are going to be honest again and to grow twice or three times and then it will be banned officially. so our forecasts is very bad. i believe we still have half a year. so all of the putin. [inaudible] >> it was a fascinating conversation about what's going inside russia. [applause]

>> i also want to thank our cosponsors, the institute for your pain russia and eurasia's studies, c-span and tall of you for coming. i wish you i wish you a happy thanksgiving. thank you much. [applause] [inaudible] [inaudible] >> up next up next on c-span two, panel discussing how the trump administration might approach the issues of biomedical innovation, healthcare, and drug pricing. that a pricing. that a look at how food companies market to children. later, in case case you just misted a conversation on russia under vladimir putin. c-span's "washington journal", live every day with new some

policy issues that impact you. coming up thursday morning, economic adviser to president-elect trump stephen moore joins us to discuss mr. trump's a proposal to lower taxes and increase the number of jobs and plans to grow the economy then robert weissman, president of the nonprofit organization public citizen will talk about their plans to fight the trump administration on deregulation. watch c-span's "washington journal" live 7:00 a.m. eastern on thursday morning. join the discussion. >> next a conversation on biomedical innovation, healthcare and drug pricing. panelists include a health a health policy advisor to president obama's transition team, former fda commissioner in a pharmaceutical company vice president. the milken institute hosted the event in new york city.

>> thank you for being here. regardless of your politics ii think it is safe to say this past week has been a little tumultuous. for policy. i think think either way, no matter who won theand c. election healthcare issues would have been front and center. you can imagine that were hillary clinton is president-elect of having a panel on the drug pricing crackdown. instead because donald trump is our president-elect the new hasd been dominated with talk of obama care repeal. some of the issues most important to the sector have been a little over shadow. foris me me selfishly this is a treat, i've had my head down and with what the epa's first steps is gonna look like. i'm curious to know what happene for the sector by bright experts to talk to that this morning. i think we will start is this, sitting in this room we are 1 mile exactly from trump tower.

if i l i looked on google maps, maybe maybe apple maps has a slightly different calculation. tom trump tower has 58 floors. for the sake of argument will say it takes about a second or so to go up every floor. imagine you. imagine you are riding the elevator with the president-elect and hypothetically he might not know a lot about the inner workings ofow healthcare, just go with me on this. imagine you can tell him anything about this industry, what is what is your literal elevator pitch in 60 seconds. >> i am going to tell mr. trump to think very carefully about policies that have an impact on the pharmaceutical industry. like ge, that bring good thing to light, we are in good things

to life and to people. innovation is is crucially important to keeping our country healthy as well is to keeping our country prosperous. our companies employ tens ofco thousands of people in good paying, scientific and technological jobs so we do contribute to the economy, most and partly our number one priority and the thing that we make our greatest contribution to his patients all over this country and globally whose lived we saves and in whose lives we make a huge and important difference. his policies could change that dynamic not only for companiesde individually's buffer every single patient in america. >> do i have another few seconds? >> i think he says there six or eight floors but depending on

how you take it. >> how about you? i would tell mr. president-elect , i know you have recommendation for names and appointments, but i would employ you to put policy before people and persons. what i mean by that is whoever you select ultimately is going to have to do with the fact that there are enormous policy issues and changes that are going to affect the federal agencies that are involved in healthcare and biomedical research. we are looking at for example former commissioners of the f da has been working on the recommendation of the food and drug administration and all the new onset goes with that. there are now over ten federal

agencies that fund biomedical research to the extent of tens of billions of dollars. there is a significant policy question around do we need to have a greater coordination of that federal spending as a boost to a policy that in braces public private partnerships in the relationship with industry. so so before making critically important decisions about personnel, i believe it's important for you and youran leadership to pay very close attention to the macro policy questions that are going to shape the future of biomedical research, and therefore the future of healthcare in this country. >> so i would certainly say ditto to both of those very eloquent elevator speeches, myself very much hammer home to folks on patient send us much porridge progress as we have made a point out that there are

thousands of rare diseases for which there are no treatmentshe and families that are suffering. i would hammer home on the economic message. i. i think that would resonate with his campaign. in terms of the number of jobs and what it means and otherreseh research centers, but it's a little bit different just to think the other message that i think we should talk about is the need for global partnerships and some of his comments in the context of trade have suggested that we might not have the same level of collaboration globally and i would want to point out this is not an industry that can go forward alone, is very much dependent on collaborationndentl agreements and harmonization is another big thing to focus on. that would be a third message tn

focus on and finally i wouldo want to emphasize that we need to be mindful of impact across all patient population groups being mindful of health equityml considerations and particularly giving some of the rhetoric of the campaign that this is an area that we would have to be sensitive to in the days ahead. >> his head is swirling withswid important things. i think i would probably start off on the six floor after the massive escalator strut me up. i would just say echoing all the things that have been said, and a a new leader in the position has a knee-jerk reaction to want to take action quickly. i think if he has done his 90 day plan one of the most important things he could do is take a step back and really listen.

he has shown an uncanny ability to listen to voices that have previously been on heard around the country. in some ways that's what we need to do for any major policy change is take a step back and understand what the system does look like, the complexity of it and the fact that companies like myself operate in 150 countries all over the world, and really understand the problems that are facing them. the problems facing this country in our industry were the samee before and after the election. what the first thing he could do is really set a tone for the principle and how he wants to resolve those issues. so of principle a patient first and really wanted to stimulate an economy to provide an environment that rewards and supports innovation but also one that meets and addresses the needs of a lot of voices out there that are looking for the continued options for affordable healthcare. he also can set a tone by reaching out to the business

sector and to all of us in the room and say the way of getting there is not just go with small pleat bowl in the room but to reach out and listen to the ideas that each one of you and each one of us in the sector may have to address the problems. >> before i start i should tello you that margaret gave me the slides last night. and so i don't quite get. >> i'm happy to have that conversation. >> this is what the people came to hear. [laughter] the elevator hasn't started yet. >> i think we have a president who probably doesn't understand

the nuances of healthcare and biomedical research.sa so i would say to him and give him a little history and remind him in 1945 bush road at the request of roosevelt a report about how the federal government could relate to science having just come out of the war effort in having the developed an important relationship with thet community what is going to come next, should we just stop now that we don't have a warning warning more in the answer surprised roosevelt and manyot others and what he said was support basic research. the federal government must support basic research becausese private sector cannot. it operates on a different timescale, and ask ask open-ended questions i cannot be answered.th so the first answer is that and that is, enunciate, use your pulpit, enunciate the importance of fundamental discovery. we heard julie answer a stirring

call to remind us of the importance of that.ec the second message would be the the federal -- is expanded because of the way that scientific research has gone in the connection to patients andnd health healthcare that is that we nownu need to build a continuum from that fundamental discovery all the way beyond clinician and social behavioral and population scientists into the community ob patients but also that of healthy people because it's by gathering and operating together that we will be able to gather the information needed in this new world of big data that will be able to establish connections that will allow us to see through to mechanisms of disease in a process to curing them. wah >> i've heard something's overlap and maybe we should jusu have a base now that we've

informed the next president on where we stand, republicans will hold onto congress, they will now control the white house. was this election ultimately good for this sector? and as someone who is seen the industry from different angles let's start from you was thent selection good for the sector? >> i believe it it has the potential to be incredibly positive. i would justify that in a few different ways first of all, i think with the new this new administration and with a view towards tax policy and regulatory policy i believe there's the opportunity for an enriched climate for this sector. on one hand addressing issues about repatriation, trillions of dollars available to be brought back into this country. hundreds of billions of dollars on the balance sheets of major

corporations in this country goo like google and that money has basically been sitting on the sideline.right fiscal pol with the right tax policies in the right investment policies we have the opportunity to pull that back and an opportunity for enriched investment. we can talk about infrastructure but infrastructure for the biomedical community including infrastructure around data and education of the next generation those can be themed that this fm administration couldn't erase. then you have the other regulatory issues about reforms in the regulatory process at thi fda which could create a much more exciting climate for early-stage investment or venture capitalists because thee pipeline could not get a bit

more precise and more optimistic.ve i believe from those standpoints when you couple that with the continued explosion that will occur as keith pointed out in science and technology itself, the next four years could be the best of times not the worst of times. and i >> overall some optimism for the sector, repatriation and so on, do you agree with andy's assessment? >> i agree with it and i think the financial markets agreedee with that as well. the market went up right after the election. within hours of the election, first dropped and then went back up the number of analysts in particular pointed out this is the time to invest in the biopharmaceutical industry. i think they made that recommendation based on what andy was talking of but also

another issue and that is the issue of the assault on drug pricing that has been taking place and was one of the cornerstones of secretary clinton's campaign. that assault on drug pricing could have had a continuing downside impact on the industry. i think the expectation now that secretary clinton is not in the white house is that at least to some extent, some of the pressure that places all of this emphasis on the price of drugs instead of talking about the value of drugs is going to settle down a bit.ty to tell he will give our industry an opportunity to tell her story more directly and without a higa level of acrimonious debate.

our story is about patience andb value. it's about the fact that our healthcare system is a multi- partition operation such as about the price of one product including prescription drugs that they need. i th that conversation of how all the how they can all work together that access to drugs and the other services in the system can take place more effectively in a non- shrieking environment. i think that is what we can expect to have in thisis particular case. >> let's put the patient issue

on a spending plan come back to it in a moment. the idea that secretary clinton to your point donald trump has heard he is not a stranger to campaigning on the hydra price issue two. while republicans in congresst might be a bit more tepid thera democrats you don't know really know that donald trump can do. >> i do think that we have to acknowledge that there are a lot of consumers who when they go to the pharmacy counter face payments and insurance rates that are not affordable fore not them. that didn't change after the election. we have i think for us as a company we look at that and we know we have

to take our own actions and own responsibilities. so for us not even in the last two years, the last five years we priced our things responsibility to be at or below the therapies were looking toe replace. that's a fact that we as an industry have to continue to build upon. it's not just about our science and and innovation is about us working as a responsible company, and industry within the ecosystem acknowledging the role that we play in saving lives and addressing illnesses but also i what we can do to help improve e healthcare and make that system or sustainable. >> let's put this route for a second, in the world were secretary clinton had been elected and maybe there's more focus on drug pricing, our solutions better or worse off, let me ask more directly, did donald trump selection, did the

results of last tuesday help or hurt america's patients ultimately? >> i think you have to take a step back and say at this dialogue at this point time i think with the campaign that are bad for sector at some point you have to start at the top and look back at president-elect trumps record and in terms of his campaign proposal they have been not particularly welltherea detailed, there is not a meaningful focus on biomedical or biotech issues, that's one. if we if we look at some of his statements on science, climate change issue be in a next line to example, is quite dismissive of the science, that is true fos some of his supporters. >> he doesn't believe in climate change right. i think from a scientific level we've pass that debate really. perhaps another play, the third

i mentioned the globalization issue is of the stock market here went up on foreign markets crash and there's a lot comparing globally. i also think that some of the focus on replacing the aca he is taking half a step back not aki little bit. but if you like in terms of fundraising venture capital funding is that a fragile state for some of the biotech companies i work with. any of these major changes its hugely disruptive and it has tremendous uncertainty. i worry about some of the proposals and what that will mean for financing. in keeping the industry going i. a robust way. so the jury is out for me. i don't say it's going to be terrible but i do think it will

be important to see what comes forward through the transition team in terms of who has political appointees will be, what proposals will come out and also compare that's what happens in the congress. it's a very long way to say i'm not sure what this means for patients. posi i do have a number of concerns that i'm not willing to say that it will be positive for people. >> let's get to the transition t stuff in a moment. sticking with your point about the uncertainty and what that means for the industry and f whether that is good or bad, your feeling that it could be put potentially bad any reaction? i >> i actually think it's good that the president-elect did not take a very hard position onof some of these issues. so they can actually pull back from. we can begin to shape the future. that may may be specific, i don't think anyone

on either side would not want to see us address the critical problem of the price of drugs.r but i think it is a matter of what you would do about that. price controls and demonizing the industry in my opinion would not be a very positive thing and it would ultimately negatively impact patients. t there are other possible solutions and ways of doing this, i think think if you look at the people who are advising president-elect trump and i will take specifically newt gingrich, he has spoken about this in a variety of ways about what we can begin to do including with alzheimer's creating an opportunity for bonds that could be able to find and offset costs , i think this administration could be open to innovative ideas because andrew lowe and economists at mit has

worked on a concept which is essentially mortgage for medicine. so i think going forward we don't have to view the solution to the problem of price drugs by simply looking at price controls, but rather look at innovative other ways to eliminate or divert on the patient. we can figure our system i'm optimistic that we have an open space that we as a community ought to contribute to and help the new administration to find those new solutions. you ar >> one more perspective, keith you're working with clinical trials fluency and research be done, what is your perspectivesp on what's happened in the past week? >> i think there are cause for concern based on what we heard in the campaign about evidence-based decision-making

but i think this is not a time for trenching and on those concerns as opposed to really finding people to sit down and talk with, newt gingrich is a gt great example and beginning to educate the administration about what the potential opportunities are for the administration to do things that would be recognized by the american populace is really contributing to things that will have an effect on their health and healthcare. an example would be drug pricing i looked at from a different perspective. that is that the way that pharma makes money is by selling the drug that the fda approves. and selling those drugs to make

money means they have to cover the cost of the things that didn't work. understanding the mechanism of medicine approaches and if we better understand mechanisms of the disease lead to smaller trials and more success of those trials and therefore less obligation to cover cost and things that didn't work.basics that approach of being able to say let's get back to the basics and figure out the disease in ways that will drive down the cost for drug companies to survive will have an impact on the health care drug costs. the right now the major drivers of healthcare costs in this country. everyone agreed it's not sustainable.i think th so here's a way to approach it directly. here's here's that message that i would try to establish.

>> one of the most encouraging parts of the election is that president-elect trump is a businessman. most people running running the complexity of a large business the way he has want a lot of information befors they make decision.i reflect and to on andy's common the fact that he didn't take an ideological position may be a positive thing because it may signal that he's open to all ideas. if he sets up away in working with the industry with patients and academic, the the financial services industry and all peoplt in the ecosystem i think we will come with better solution. i don't think we have heard that he doesn't care about affordable care or there isn't in principle a goal that continue to have 22,000,000 people with insurance, the way of getting b >> is a buhere there needs to be work in the details. >> as a businessman trump does

have experience in different businesses and retail, i'm not sure about trump drugs, maybe i can get that started up. but if i can paraphrase, the sector overall with thinkers likely benefited from the election, patients may be are about to be determined before we get to policies that could be ruled out i think the question right now is what happens next with the transition. who is going to be put into place, what does the new administration need to do? we had some folks that had experience seeing ad transition through.th you. i feel like we could start with you. it's it's not hypothetical, the trump team might actually need based on what sources have said they could use some advice on how to figure out the transition stuff next. so what comes now for thehe president-elect and his team especially around health care? >> we've seen a lot of announcements coming forward,

the transition team is being>> m assembled. >> and i'm a terrible moderator, i should sit you had went through this a few years ago. >> i was on obama's transition transition team. quite the experience on everyce level. the first is having a transition team in place. the core members on board. they will have two main tasks,is the first and mrs. morrissey announced identify and begin to vet potential candidates for the highest level of political appointee positions. the cabinet secretaries, that is an intense job balancing the right experience both in terms of managing large organizations and having policy credibility, being able to work with others and be part of a team. it's a difficult process. p even on a parallel track working through that there is an intense

interest to formulate policies. if president trump will not want to start the first in office starting to think through what are my priorities now starting at that point, he wants to be ready to hit the ground and push congress to pass some of those right away. i think a prime prime example is president obama during his transition team that's when we drafted, that wa ready to be passed by the congress and signed by the president and the earliest days of the administration. so those are very critical function of the transition teamm working closely with congress to think about the first hundred days what are we going to be able to say that we've accomplished for the american people. when

for everyone in this room back to keith's point, when i was was on the transition team we met with a lot of groups from different parts of the sector they came with their ideas and suggestions of who can fill the role of the positions to make sure that their priorities were on our play. i think this is a time now to seek these types of meetings and >> aretments to navigate people can help facilitate those meetings. i think it's an opportunity time to start the conversation. >> when he said he met with lots of groups a talk in 20. >> like 50 or 60, that's the core transition team but there's volunteers, volunteer advisers who help me even more. >> i think it's true because of the change in administration and

the change in political parties each want to make sure what else needs to be added or retooled they will want to hear about that. >> this is a selfish question so when you meet with those groups how do you decide who is with scheduling a with. a talk about only national association industry lobbies? >> i think a number of big groups are groups you would expect. so your patient advocacy groups and the major trade associations, i don't know they would anyone would be surprised in terms of who we met with. >> one of the things that's typical about a transition is the instability in the anxiety.

an as instability about policy and anxiety and about personnel. i actually will insert a commercial here because at this particular moment as far as our community is concerned one of the most important things that i think could occur right now, immediately is the passage of the 21st century legislation, is that was set the stage and eliminate a lot of instability and uncertainty that has been swirling around both with regard to funding and regard to policy. it would allow, it would decompress some of the anxiety that is in our sector and it would give the nixon administration a little more time to address more far-reaching policy issues and then make the decision as to what kind of leadership you would need for that. i think

think one of the most important things this transition could do would be encourage congress to get that bill passed. >> i want to spend some time ont the 21st century legislation and who knows that might be moving this recent appear. but because of your experience i'm curious since we're talking about the transition, what is the skill, talent or perspective that the next fta needs to navigate where this industry is heading? >> i strongly believe that is skill set they should be looking for around leadership andd organizational management. not technical skills or professional skills, it's not important that the head of these agencies be notable scientists are famous clinicians, thatin would be important and nice to critical have but most critically important is can they provide the leadership and the most

important element of that is teambuilding. this game has changed from golf and it is now basketball. it's integrated into performance and if we don't have leadership that knows how to coach and teach and manage that we have serious problems. i think they have to look deep into these organizations because this next administration is going to be hallmarked by reform they want a different way of doing business whether it is in fta, nih or elsewhere. the next leadership is going to have to be adept at that. >> let's talk about 21st-century. i'm assuming most people in this room know what ig is, there's a big question over whether it's going to get resolved in the lame duck congress that came back today or

may be pushed off again. i know this is not going to play well on c-span, a show of hands, who thinks 211th century cures is going to get through congressst this year? >> very few people, which means means you are either pessimistic or political -- of >> as we joked earlier journalists know nothing.tury some folks do know quite a bit and one of those is keith, you are on the hill last week lobbying around 21st-century when this panel was up your heading back to d.c. to talk more. tell us what you are hearing in your conversation with lawmakers. >> last week was a long time ago but i say that i was fairly optimistic, we talked with people from both parties both the house and senate side,

nobody is against biomedical research. nobody is against cancer research, so if you're not going to give frank opposition to a topic and this congress would like it to have some win dennis back in terms of saying -- there a few things i can say it worked in the right direction. so i heard some optimism about getting something through the house before thanksgiving andth that's coming up soon. and then moving on to the senate and finish up in the lame duck. so we'll see if it really happens. there's still a huge amount ofth ground to cover in terms of reaching an agreement about mandatory versus appropriated

and so forth over the funding. their big issues of where the pay forces going to come from that changed a lot and so those big hills to climb are still there. i encountered a fair amount which should get a gun. >> so eagerness on the hill what about your read, you seem legislation moved to d.c. >> i would agree. i think biomedical research is something that is motherhood and apple pie. i don't think it's weather night are gonna you're gonna have opponents to this i think it's a matter of timing whether there are bigger agendas that play where it's going to be needed for other things. where forget it and the year with a spending bill or start the year with a tax cut. all of these think congress is busier than it anticipated going into the next administration.

>> i have heard that given what's happened in the past week there is less appetite now than there might have been if clinton had won the white house. and now that it's. been >> i know you have an informed perspective on where you want to see the legislation go,. >> i think that the most important pieces of that legislation of the additional funding for the cancer moonshot and the additional funding for nah that are different from things that are going on right now. having said that, i think from the perspective of the development of biopharmaceutical pharmace products i think there are many components of the legislation which one could argue are going

on now, but it is really important that congress, even if sending a message says some of these things need to be focused on. you did such great work on it, you need to have a way to qualify biomarkers. not everybody knows what it biomarkers. it became this issue thattso ita suddenly america was about biomarkers. whether it you could argue that within the legislative language in the bill what the rule is going to change or whether you could argue that congress is sending a signal to fda, pay s attention to this it's really

important. i think both of those are equal. i think there are important messages in that bill as well as important changes in that bill that could advance the development of biopharmaceutical products and could get the developed more efficiently soor patients can get them sooner. i want to go back to something that keeps the about howow clinical trials are too big and long.ia one of the things that we have focused on is also focused on in 21st century is to say that we have slim down the fta review process. they're practically reviewinguhn drugs between six and eights modes across the board. that is pretty good.

where we haven't slimmed-down is the amount of time it takes to develop drugs. we have to be innovative in how we design clinical trials. we have to be innovative and how we look at the date and innovative in our thinking of the multiple sources that exist. how can we we take advantage of real-world evidence. how could we take a vantage of it for clinical trial when we are looking at drug safety all of these things are crucially important to get drugs developed factors. we cannot slimmed-down but we

can sure slimmed-down drug 2 development and 21st century care says let's all put our heads together and figure out how to slimmed-down drugrug development.produc so we can get the safe and effective products to the market more quickly, less expensively, and everybody is to win in the kind of battle. >> do you agree what we just heard. >> i think there certainly is a priority. i'm hopeful the 21st century cures will make it through. i think it is still very much an intention of the congress. so we will know more as we finish the panel.

so all of the reasons i was mentioned the currentnistration administration additional level of importance because some of those programs that would be formally authorized by given the promise of this initiative or fr others not to be any retrenching in the new administration. i think it also help father reasons again there is that pension the arm. for the purpose of this. >> what the process was their

policy issues that had to be addressed within the legislation and then there were political issues that were in play as well. i think right now if the bill doesn't get pass because of political issues of who gets credit for what there's going to be retribution for that. this bill has taken over two and a half years to pull together. >> think of how young we were when it started. >> together bipartisan supportcy it was a tremendous amount of our work of their more townhomes and if this doesn't pass before the next congress comes and that

all goes away. we start all over again. the bill can carry over. we have to start again. when that happens there be other things on the table that it will be almost impossible to get focused on this. anyone who opposes this politically because i think the policy issues have been taken off the table. if you oppose a politically and it doesn't happen i think they community is going to hold that accountable. >> i agree with you andy. i do think there is a lot of anger on capitol hill right now. particularly among democrats who support it and resounding support it when it passed the house and democrats who have come together on the senate side. there is a lot of anger and the question i have in my mind is with her that anger about the election results not

just the presidential, but across across the board in the country will break apart that alliance that happened over the course of that two years and that you will see this political pullback. but i don't disagree with you i don't want to say that there will be consequences, but there will be consequence and anger among the public if that sort of drives away what they see as being a very positive thing that congress has been able to pull together over the last couple of years.with those >> i think the issues addressed between 21st century cures are top priorities for democrats, i

don't expect democratic opposition to be an issue. if clinton had won the white house then perhaps there would've been a breaking of the coalition and in that case democrats were to push harder for more things to be added to the 21st century kurt cures. given to your point will have to be renegotiated. with a diminished margin in congress as well as the white house. a but i do not expect the democrats to support it. clearly my predictions have been wrong. coal >> the election obviously is like the black hole, just sucking our attention and energk and 21st century 21st-century cures is worthy of attention to. what are we at risk of missing. the california drug price

release act got defeated. we talked a little bit about the cancer moonshot. what are we most at risk of not paying enough attention to maybe we can start with you. >> i think the administration may not recognize the power it has to bring federal agencies to gather around to an imperative. if look at the way the moonshot has developed so everyone knows it was to make ten years of progress in cancer research and five years. so their goal is a task force was to identify elements in the ways that we work that are serving as barriers for more rapid progress. one of the things that the

moonshot task force did was to pull together some 20 federal agencies that perceived as being able to contribute to making cancer research move faster. that task force was charged with sitting down together and figuring out things they could do cooperatively that right now they are not to incorporate to to make the effort move more quickly. if we expand that notion to santa the administration you have a chance to be able to do something that in the federal government is very hard and that is to get agencies that fight for their budgets every year to go to the hill and get their money in a way they do that is to convince congress that what they are doing, if it gets stopped we'll just be dead. and the way they do that is from every other agency so they can say we're doing something unique and no other agencies touching it. . . .

shinkin do things and they have done wonderful job for that job and for that group. and then to motivate these agencies to work together. and we are in danger of missing that. wan one eyed team of rivals? >> what do you t >> theme of that >> barrett is a very a tempting trot to focus on

just focus on our problems as a country with i would not want the administration to miss that our industries are eagle and there is the need for us to participate in the campaigns are the in issues that address global health so like companies and very interested in what could be any assistance to stimulate new innovation and be have not had in new antibiotic for over 30 years . even here the expectation of some of vp paul some 23,000 will die. so we as this ourselves cannot fault that so i hope the administration recognizes there are things

that we have been held to reach across the global partners to identify ways. >> but we do know and isolationism had you already planned select our company is headquartered in the uk so you see from asides of the atlantic. so i think for us cooler heads will prevail and these problems that exist today how we get there with the very fresh set of eyes what about the marketplace?

how you get better bigotry alignment? -- with this next industry shipwrecks. >> what about this transition blacks. >> and then what i said previously part of it. [laughter] >> but to pick up on what you said before to something to be ready to go with the first 100 days into the term certainly but i was so whittle troubled but congress is moving very

rapidly. traffic to this set them pacified and it is going at 60 m.p.h. less than one week after the election. if they inactive have established firm policies there is flexibility for potentially that we're not taking the time to go to the process so all of the collaboration, the partnerships what does industry really need? for some of this to slowdown a little bit what are those people where are their priorities?the race s so that it is some of my concerns at this point time

there are these themes floating around the most critically important issue that keeps me out - - up night the need to focus on education. if you'd want to see this accomplished did health care anything that we look forward to being is all based on the next generation. and we have to focus on that right now in terms of the education system to nurture and develop those young minds. because eight years from now coe

we will lobby's generating that creativity that we used to.e and how we have biomedical research. in money we need to identify so they can change the zero world strike if it is harder for immigration do you see that as a challenge? >> this has to be comprehensive and mike milken says he is focusing in human capital with a significant driver of gdp for any nation or any country. you either grow that by birth rates in richet make

that is central theme for the transition. what about this teeming capital of this nation in the 21st century? >> i worry about focusing on only those things that our long boasted him that hath bent before they got there was changed or fixed so they failed to support equally on what is working well. they are eager to make a difference by making a change. or to make a difference with

the fda is an agency that is very important to our industry into we represent not everything is bad. so for a those companies that are regulated by the fda so if the market thinks that suddenly everything will change and predictably and not for those who are waiting for innovative products. so thinking about what to do next and what to do first

that everything has to be changed or fixed. and those in the working very well as well as look the same good works okay simex so we don't take audience questions? so i will try to act on on behalf. >> you just talked about looking forward maybe not necessarily in the transition so what do you think of the obama administration of the rapture and of the term how good was set for the sector? >> that is a hard one.bad for te

i don't take it was bad for the sector over the year period and for the did general policies or the of los issues raised from time to time on the pharmaceutical sector it is very influenced so for example, a tweet by then candidate clinton about drug prices literally caused the bottom to fallout of the biopharmaceutical market. every betty's stock went in the tank. investors backed away.

it is momentary with at fluctuation but there is the overall negative view and have that biopharmaceutical industry if needed and to constantly having to justify it is sent always of big fatal think it where is bad but i think there were moments where they had less than an thrilling. >> efta was caught up in some challenges with the possibility if it was approved through political pressure.

>> bid is the agency insulated enough from political pressures and to be first in policy so for those decisions whether a drug or device should be approved is based on science . and going into the publicd

realm of shapes of policy.fic and then make my point clear . should milk from the cloned cows have be put into the milk supply? the scientific point of view is absolutely yes.t for that that has beenen cloned.or but from a policy point of view from a cloned it cowd tracd and immediately their overall shot off.e said the agency and the commissioner have to be a part of that bass back of

government. mw if there is a conflict tendon make the decision. a mine to say that this is contrary . but the theater he and it is not the best interest from a policy point of view but i can track. >> i enders and all of the things that you have to

balance and from your vantage point did you know, concerns how the fda makes their decision there coulda be a precedent. >> to be perfectly candid but then to decide to the works of morals in public>> cemeteries and number of initiatives with the push toward more precision and

then to say you were all the be need. >> but to start very early with the impact is that but how those initiatives are constructed whether it has to do with any other company is exciting but pet trying to the industry does not recognize.recognize in one of the industry and its values to society.

there are certain things so whether it is the transition whiff and then to help the giant budget but it is hopefully a continued evolution to realize the industry can be harnessed also to improve patient care . and i do think that it is too early to tell buti love then relative to how we work together in hoping that continues into the future. >> i would argue those initiatives are working thatng calls into oppression the

role of the administration and they're not saving big accounts. well investigated challenge demonstrates a success because it brings into the endeavor of the individual fed did not think of themselves to say that we really need to involve engineers and physicists in computer science for those challenges and effective way and of course, that was true with the sequencing of the human genome. we are not achievable. we had a hard time getting our rocket little on taking

a man to the moon from. >> and with my favorite don a good day is a long way from 3 billion. and what happened is people from other fields said i could do something coho -- sandoz sciences and engineers. >> maybe we could make some progress i would argue that the initiative have already done that.that these are challenges that will expand administration we have measures that sayw thata what they can bring forward really make the country hungry. >> so people can come along for the ride.

>> let's end with one question. who is the 01 person that you will be watching in 2017 with the impact on this industry? bernie sanders, it could be somebody else. i am hoping you will not say donald trump is not the answer. right. i think everybody is thinking about their answers. [laughter] >> she is and have to think about hers. >> go ahead. at on that to answer the questions i just ask them. [laughter] but i am very curious i want to know because they think

that person stepping in and after option and then paul ryan macro and where have that's my an i should not have to give up because i moderator laugh laugh. >> i would keep my ear to the ground in. he is an adviser to mr. trump and mr. trump listens to him. and over his congressional career and then has remained extremely.

>> but forsake of time? xx new day are correct. >> i do not. i can tell you afterwards. [laughter] >> i would say the new secretary. >> whoever that might be quite. >> >> those are all good. i am going to watch barack obama.ar he has more interested in capacity to capture thest current challenges that wet have to say and do more things about them. but with that been an industry my medical research by realizing those imperatives for technology

he had talked about before there was a wrinkle and thanks. [applause] los angeles in octoberns]

>> is a pleasure for me tosa be here and there is some really amazing work that will come of this and already has. would be possible? and i am happy for decades when his work will react of that context i am looking for deer comments later today? to make it is importuned ricans of fruit chief off rage and then talk about the

factors ford to seize a round the world. here but then in this particular list but is in your part because people raising efficient cookstoves meaning respiratory health solo law can be but instead of talking about any particular body of evidence better broader concept of how can we take the work that we do as professionals

and scholars to create maximum impact from it? that is good two-way. >> but how much change does that lead to n could be tightened up for those maximum exchange for the efforts. most of us hope that we produce knowledge sasser says want society but is a stressful process and the keeper press but to produce

that scholarship there could be those empirical studies or leave goldman but with us small group of like-minded people in the professional world sometimes they could be struggling but if feels big it but the question is does it really? because research very often misses most important of all which is close supposition to do something to sendai's between scholarship band paula c. what they used to describe this is a relay race prickly will only qualify menu hard disqualified in no way to

look for breaks. >> what is in our hands is not knowledge. there is somebody help their to successfully but then to be motivated to coordinate the of proper i can we typically attribute the lack t of firm backed to those purse -- recipients to know about our goodwill. and just say apple's because that will make it easier that weaver's he erred for the world as possible. >> of course we would not do that but what would we do?

that would take a long time to get it done pending collaboration to be in that position that takes forever to get them done. % naked communicate to themselves and that policy needs out there. >> yes to krupp in the house side world isn't it true you do on as the wings fare well >> can you could bring a solution. >> this is how we fixed the

problem like people i a those set the food policy i work for a number and have an but definitely that does need to be linked to those changes agents with that policy change. so to begin the question who are the people from the institution in a position to do anything about the problem that we care about? have to be creative bead book that forms an opportunity based on the real world. >> take those people who run regulatory agencies but the

courts and become very important one player saw as a real and honest one but depending on what particular in japan-bashing there is one top of militants the web from rehab and but to get that incredibly important careers terseness but then and theye the policy change. it could give us some ofat mission this to -- so too identified said changes tom

define the questions that we do then creating their research for scholarship and then to have the effective communications opportunity going right back to the change i.c.e. and but you're interested want. >> bed jennifer in is your using with the eds site but the first project was on the market for less than the baker up center on the

reports that have been done. differs -- the first group is to find homages being marketed and what in particular? so fancy to create a painless done my a breaking swales worst -- revolutionat to the best of the bottom the worst of the bottom of the most my eight in what they do when terms of marketing it could be serious if you take the best of the dozen cereals and if look to see how much marketing is don throughrn other you don't but with

those scores we can fill in the grade with what is marketed to children still he is terribly unhealthy but if they didn't they do a pretty good job that it. and with that hypothesis -- a prophesies why the market. release markets to children when they have healthier products in their portfolio. snowden we were going to release the zero hoping to generate so people and policy makers could understand what was happening. we tried to predict the and it wasn't too hard to break this because but they often

don't collaborate they're often at each other's necks with dated around but deficits at the back of the drawer in the kids will not eat it is dave we euphemism for quiet. [laughter] we are more likely to be to breakfast so what they say is eating breakfast is a good thing and second.

>> to the have industry's defense so led by a routine that it was undertaken at the runt center to get children access to give the lower sugar version of the silvery -- cornflakes as they chose to steal as much and they could add sugar import fruit on it. the but the studies found a the low sugar version killed half of what she would but

for those that with so of those will companies but we hope and as necklaces sugar that in fact, -- to effect it was true so why are they marketing bill these healthy >> no-no butted nobody in the tired and time is world for what in and then a very strategic question with the whole discussion of.

>> debt to whatever extent replay a role, through a mechanism like this that theit process from and it could have a massive public health effect. we can do a lot of studies and never get to the gap, but one was pretty important. >> a.m. 2009, the foodst

industry got together essentially with itself to create

marketing is a typical business practice the went to the store with my goddaughter there were no books all covered with coca-cola branding. that is what they what to - - if they want to do with the people purchase that generally speaking are not suffering from the problem so we have to go deeper to think about the exposures we know kids of color particular african-american and latino suffer more from diabetes than their counterparts also getting extensive exposure for the wrong stuff. select that the data and

84 percent of food and drink advertised to kids on spanish tv is a healthy black kids he twice as many advertisements for sugary drinks so we can see who is being targeted. the other thing is that we have a digital divide in this country. quit holmes a don't have a computer or accessing the most people do have a mobile device she cannot do your homework on there but they will target you with advertising in and to see kids of color have more time than their white counterparts. so this is another problem that is exasperatingly things. so i will show you what this looks like berger after

having a discussion later today. so product means the products themselves mean they are developed for kids and the promotion in their own language not just spanish or english with the language of the use that they can relate to that is but those burgers and lunchables that they were talking about. and the marketing and what you don't necessarily have a promotion like sponsorship of defense.

of the schools of upstream illustrations to help the parents understand what marketing looks like because people don't necessarily think of a vending machine as marketing so that digital aspect makes that more intensive and i will spend my time talking about this. just to put some context think of a tobacco company putting this into a competition how they capture the youth audience and then look at mcdonald's and snap chat. >> mcdonald's does not just talk redo digital

predators out to be one hell of a year. we made headlines on snap chat defers to brand ever to have filters and f-14 thousand + those that are sharing stamps to their networks of friends. it is 308 million viewers. >> so now you see with the line goes down where people are going they're very proud as of the customers sharing snaps with our messages to their network of friends. there is already confusion about intent that completely goes away for your that

editorial that is blurred because it is french french message. with any alert and that is a problem. so now we have a situation midair physically surrounded with increasingly digital always on personalized information to become a brand ambassadors going friend to friend with interesting research with a brain development and the connection with what happens in the digital world and what excites the young people's brains and then to be any -- included with any type of restrictions. so here is the senior brand manager for mellon do him

and he said this will line everything we have done into a hub for youth culture is died minnesota cage transition from the campaign specific approach to delays on approach that is the key. i will show you one of the ads from pepsico that it did for mountain dew that did not appear in television bayou to i find it very disturbing i will sari to show it to you but you should see what they are targeted to audiences that may not be sitting in this room. >> we have them all lined up .

point to them. i don't think i can do this. the ones with forelegs? keep your mouth shut. keep your mouth shut. i cannot do this. mw no. no. no. no. no. >> she is going to do it estimate by has been said he did know if it was the violence against women or the ratio stereotypes that is worse and series of ads that since have been taken down when pepsico created

with the crater there is more to say about did course but it is something you would not see if you were not part of the target audience of we need to understand the whole gamut of what they're doing the i will leave it there now talk more about the other avenues the digital marketing of this is a very popular showing youtube -- youtube the complaint went in today from the citizen for digital center for a violation that they see here and i will explain what they are looking at for. this is long been his nearly 18 minutes long to kents in have a show to put on blindfolds that are given in taste of what ever it is

spicy or yankee in dysentery adorable and cute and they have a lot of viewers. keep in mind to the 32nd commercials people were concerned about because the evidence was so strong the incident -- institute of medicine said we should do something. that is not that of the park by this because it goes on so long and the engagement is so when tens which is what the digital landscape is all about. be are so addictive to our television:negative telephone the kids are native to this and a pale lot of attention. so this is called the upper angle's challenge you can see there were 27 million views and it goes on 18 minutes and most of what they're doing is about food. so we have a real problem

that we don't know laugh about in terms of the effect of kids that we need some of research but my assumption is if we know 302nd television advertisements have been a factor that i will put my money on the fact is 18 minutes deep impeachments has an even stronger defect. and there is knowledge or the companies would not be doing it but that is proprietary knowledge net the industry doesn't have to go through the institutional review board like we do that the university. with the rapidly changing environment picasso to target those racial ethnic groups. and to help the parents

understand. as they ran around the television so they can say can we get this? so barrett is dade this entanglement. we need a lot more policy. wan and i will show you one last thing then be done. if the son of those females from the coca-cola executives from europe were leaked i am not in favor of hacking and likin but it nonetheless second not take my eyes off of this. came from a coca-cola executive they are analyzing

their policy focus to come to a strategic decision internally. on the left that the access is likely to materialize so when people got excited about was an end of member states people were excited because it was high on the impact picasso it is likely deet materialize. so what i noticed is a bunch of policies are concerned about half to do with food marketing and i circled them for you. me know and we have suspected it is gratifying that what we have been

working on will have a huge impact and to that is all in the upper left-hand corner of the high business impact. alleys right now according to coca-cola it will likely materialize. plan and i will just point out one little thing that marlene talked about the age breakdown you will see a circle on the bottom of this is the band of advertising to children must and will result. that will have a very low impact on their business. pdf that is part of the reason they are willing to do that that circle is much higher with that definition. so the idea we need to expand the definition

definitely needs to be expanded. i look forward to our discussion. [applause] [inaudible conversations] could morning. i am not a lawyer but a psychologist also because a scientist and work with

industry. so i have major conflicts of interest. but only when some of the appetite work brings into the area of policy that we are dragged into the area. so i have some interesting conflicts of interest so moving on i would like to recognize those who are carrying on our policy work in most of this is down to the hard work now 12 for 13 years in this area i show this slide with no apologies that was truly horrendous but unfortunately we never

seen anything like that despite the slide from coca-cola that i became aware of about just on the plane coming over they forded that slide i was going to show as well so television is still a popular way of communication with children particularly under 12 because that is the entry level and get in-house . it is so powerful that everything else is built around. remember their multiple media users using the computer and television at the same time. so with all of the different platforms emerging where we're operating is becoming incredibly complex. / descent advertising it just means competition in

television is less economic as the advertising media. actually advertising is getting cheaper. so now into exposure talk about the data we were stupid enough to keep it to ourselves we recorded 150,000 by 2008 was a very important year and the offense say the food stamp agency published a hasty and support for national level to demand the government take action to be put in charge in regulation came between 2008 and 2010. the regulation should cover

children to the age of 16. this is coding these are all channels popular with children. if we have a look at this foods which are defined as being healthy or unnecessary . read are unhealthy foods that you cannot do without them in your diet. there are profiling systems of whichever one that you use. this is children's television targeted at children. foods i in fact,, high and sugar, high in salt also look at family television.

that is actually much more by a large kids will watch your three hours per week but the family television is 17 hours per week. i am from northwest england little boy is in little girls watch together albany and new more about football than idyllic as sports. three-quarters of sports and remember that advertising around it doesn't include what is on the shirts. but look at music television and popular culture and it two-thirds on that. this just shows between 2008 and 2014 during the peak viewing time so looking at

the time they're not looking at those channels. deregulation is just coming in. again have 50 percent and then 2010 still over 60 percent. regulation has been in two years but still the majority . but if we break down what children are seeing or least when they're most likely to be watching and looked at the top 10 foods, now attend , only one of them is core committee will see enough fast-food has gone up . this is a regulatory system myself in regulation but the impost system. this is the one that

interests me the most. before regulation there was a particular change but look what is happening? plus cat august that is still holiday time. look at the switch of advertising. in his post regulation. so they immerse the child because there are gains with a high score then they post that and they share that through social media than the child of an agent and of those trends that we did see is that it is about children against the manufacturers. but shows the number of website links placed going

up through 2012. if you look at that data 10 years it has been a place. this is just that part of the talking in regulation. despite u.k. regulation children remain exposed from. remember our legislation and is meant to provide complete coverage and most of these are healthy foods because we talked about this earlier what the legislation is based on is the children and not the total number of hours of viewing so family shows are excluded. and to do a brilliant

ranking exercise reading the favorite programs but no. i 26 which was where pants sponge bob? [laughter] it is not popular in our household. [laughter] it was there when they kicked in so 25 more popular programs before regulation was kicking in because if you did not advertise the experience experience then the advertisement falls upside. so with prosperity to see that in other territories. europe and asia and the holiday targeting we see that in ajax as low but it is worth tracking the phenomenon.

is still think he is / tv is key but it is the entry point. live but it depends and without all of that added is very difficult to tell so self regulation is inferior if the imposed regulation is not functioning properly. >> so with a little bit about power and will not talk so much so for those areas but but i want to start with this life. i like this because it speaks to the relationship of food advertising and child abuse city.

-- child could obesity. look at the consequences over in lifetime. looking to commercial tv viewing. you can remove those effects of exercise and the relationship remains. and to the number of the of studies that got us into this mess. but 25 years i have spent studying society. but it became very clear that obesity was not down to the deficits of biology so much as the interaction or the failure to cut with the food environment so i have a

hypothesis that is very old that we can see the differences. now i just happen to choose the foot advertisements i happened to choose children because once they bring other people they guess what we are doing laugh laugh so why set out to do this study. first of all, we have a similar design ratio the advertisements in and let the kids eat so first of all, we ask the kids how many food items to remember? that is the of hypophysis proven.

but when we actually look at what they ate, all the kids over 80 years old all switched from the less energy dense healthier food to the energy dense unhealthy foods as a we replicate this many times in the very early days not very many people are operating then we are attacked by the advertising industry. and leonard wasn't addressed to me but to my bosses but

then colleagues start defending his translations of articles condemning think there's something in there so we stay in the area despite not being poured we have been appalled 10 policy areas it would not recommend which who is in this area or the european network for the prevention of marketing to unhealthy foods and beverages to children but looking from the international and gold. so what you can see is what they eat and then the effect is greater.

so all kids are full verbal the children respond more. so i put in the slide in my grad students sent them to me and i will judge showed this team you quickly that first edison dressing with normal white children but of very similar study to west but instead of choosing the food they put them on the scanner to like the choices that they need and what we found is after me gave them the the adverts day made a different choice to the things that they liked based on taste so they concede the

areas of the brain within the children's brains with the component of appetite. that is interesting it is more of cognitive control with the ability to resist food messages and they will have a lot of difficulty they feel the food is said control of them but what happened a show negative series of photos and the obese children showed that

response to the food adverts i have great difficulty showing that response there is a different deficit there those that are promoted to with celebrity endorsement want and will give you an example of each fighting that is good to give an example of each. so first of all, deer now to gary is? the famous english soccer player? he is a famous soccer player who played in europe and he

is becoming more successful people. i'm on it. he has gone into commentary with bbc one british television when all of the games that showed a preview with the of highlights. we have less similar study we the show of clap and we sell it because that is what we recognize.

we showed another groupware pom so one labeled workers at the supermarket the kids did not like the home brand. will obviously what happened and they ate more crisps they would dramatically change even though it is the same. interestingly we got the same effect from the group from presenting much of the day and the reason is they have the power outside of the adverts why would you pay them money otherwise? you don't have to pay so much money with your

development but you do pay a lot for the licensed characters like track -- or even frozen to breakfast cereals here named frozen? i had no idea. so lysol this about 40 times he was very keen on the idea that you could get breakfast cereal one but this was interesting in which they put those licenses characters on packaging or they didn't but what they

found when licensed characters are on the packaging children's taste and taste preferences and also what they chose so those licensed characters to have any effect. we did with brand equity characters like tony the tiger deal have the haribo bears over here quick. >> we put them on foods and then we did not. but also we switched them around and put them on the wrong food. what happened? could doesn't matter it could be in progress went with the food but when we put them on the increase to the preference for the food. irrespective of what it was even if they did not associate with it.

that is of power of the character to be on the food so think about these devices and the effects that they have. so as the most direct means to access as the promotional activities they have demonstrable effects of the food choice in children and that which we no overwhelming and widely get those exaggerated response and celebrity endorsement of brand equity is not the only component to but to operate beyond the adverts.

punish did reinforce those values want to independently influence the behavior. the devil finish with this director general from the who prevent diseases go against the business interest of a powerful economic operators would of the biggest challenges we face in health promotion. i like to talk about the group we are working with the school in liverpool it will be great to have international coordination if you haven't met her before she is a force of nature i would encourage you to have for speaking one of her events in the future and it is important but also the potential conflict of interest. i am a scientist do work to

produce healthy products but coming into this area i realize the horrendous conflict of interest in i am very alarmed with the operation of business that there is no policy work that has any input from industry whatsoever. if you see that slide from coca-cola remember industry is most notable in europe now messiness light i beginning to wonder. laugh laugh thanks for your attention have a good day. [applause] >> we have a lot to digest. i think we can all agree

that is a fantastic way to start the day. >> i will get us going with the first question open to the audience, we heard a lot and it is overwhelming for what must be done so my question is what is on your wish list? if you could pick a couple of things policymakers could lead take away as the most important thing to be done in of your research perspective what would those speak quick. >> in we had a change of government in the u.k. but it was ripped up because of those economic challenges of the food industry of its

still push on the efforts before 9:00. that is the policy we have been pushing it is simple there others like it with the message it is easy to communicate with. >> i was still stick with increasing the age of the definition of children if there was a way to have official definition from other organizations that have put forth if we had one here that never betty had to follow so then you include those in the audience then makes that% the of much more effective because when you allow the other kids and counted in a cover is even more shows than what you were saying. >> please think the age of imitation is very important

for the healthy eating research and recommendations with the data behind them makes the argument very clear that is important but i am also troubled by the fact in her presentation she pointed out the companies have the ability to make products that our healthier. so why don't they? if they could sell those to rio's -- doritos that is good for the schools they should make a good for everybody so when industry is asked to come together. and is trickier and i did not get into with but behind the digital marking -- marketing is big data.

but what that mean is individuals are sold one by one so the ads can be personally delivered to them there are huge privacy concerns with that and people are working on privacy issues and the ftc has engaged as we learn more about that. we have no protection for children in the digital space except for the privacy protection act for those 12 and under. there is a gap pennis to be filled editing is a murky area and it is hard to explain but essentially we have the unfair exchange by clicking yes you have soldiers health and that is a fair exchange with. >> and have one more

follow-up question then we'll open to the audience. how do you as people navigate or protect your children? what can we do or what do we do given what we've just learned? >> i don't have kids i think what you say is what can parents do? parents are responsible course what they put on the table but it is completely unfair to hold parents responsible for the billion dollar onslaught of marketing that comes to their kids out of earshot. and the thing i would like

to see parents get help with this to become active and vocal with their kids are targeted in this way. >> there have been steady showing risk of television in the bedroom so that was uneasy insert to the question. but it is so much harder now . been now have telephones and the i pad so it is virtually impossible to keep the media out of their rooms but that is one place they could try to have influence. >> i had a child in 2011 my best played hand went out the window laugh laugh this very difficult. you have the option of the bbc that is no appetizing

material or children's channels. but is in as a child goes to school and he is in contact but then they want to watch those and then bring those products to school they are good about what they want to be to. we do not have the basis entry of food companies that would shock me. but i think we have a little bit more control. because kids are getting very but you have to watch what he is looking at.

>> had the lead to research quick. >> argue asking flight to do the children have the shot over what their parents by? >> if it becomes a battleground and then doing interviews with the focus groups answer vase they feel you have to pick your battles and oftentimes that doesn't seem like a big enough battle to pick so they're leaving the children to influence the brands that they abide by this month negative by. >> thanks for the work the large doing but i have a

question for lori about the experience of marketing they pointed out? so talk more why black and latino youths are targeted so amazed seem counter intuitive but they would come from lower-income families with and not have as much disposable income but i am wondering if you think it has to do with access with the money that they have they spend more on unhealthy foods or something else going on. >> 18th there are big markets so there is in, disparity. that is why you are targeted . so the balance of what they are is where the food choices are but what comes

to mind is what is it like to come through parts of this city with those highly concentrated areas. i was talking to somebody earlier i went to high-school in the sanford ando valley in was pretty white and our history teacher was disgusted with our privilege lightness to put this on a bus to show was glossy angeles and he took us to east los angeles and that was the first time ever saw a billboard in spanish. also the first time probably i saw billboards on the sides of apartment buildings . in some neighborhoods, people have advertising they cannot turn away from because of for

they live for what the of -- what it looks like and that its data sent bear in that we're held responsible. >> those wonderful talks left me despondent laugh laugh that tidal wave of advertising to doesn't seem like there is a way to stop it. so what did you don't with later is self regulation has failed in a the government steps and what would come up later but in then to have that neckcloth cover-up one

as you are much more likely so go apply there when it comes to the advertisements that could be a more effective way is more cost-effective, more of them are migrating over. >> i do think that is a dead atf and the challenges some but there are necessarily

database i would even know why but like macdonell. author that is we are behind all the changes are happening the companies they tried to track this the -- but to make sure we applied the same standards across all of the different mechanisms. >> i think you are right rico and say certain products would be off-limits because of the nutrition standards that has to be worked out but there are people thinking about that. also is easy to reduce marketing to promotion but remember supermarkets in the biggest change of dollars for certain things in the checkout aisle design for public-interest there is

greater information about that so think about of product to sell for the reformulation and the place and we have to be vocal as citizens to say this is not acceptable so our agencies understand what is problematic. >> des don't have anything more but i do agree we should stop looking and if we're going to regulate or separate it is marketing. it all comes from marketing with those same principles and guidelines. is the ed joined so they're

doing a little different but with that responsibility of other agencies but with children both sides of the political spectrum they want to protect and that is really get traction with the press people you would not normally deal with and that can be very powerful they're only interested of sorts can it have something to do with the defective force with tobacco use against teenagers say you do think that advertising is helpful to make that? pdf. >> i fainted could be but

you could not consider that an isolation so few take california with a powerful and very effective counter advertising campaign to help people understand the industry is not your friend we had billboards up and down the state they were paid for by a staff put tobacco control programs in every county in the state where people worked on the ground to have all full range of policies and programs that they were seeking. said the campaign was part of that to you have to put that in combination with others. >> remember how much spent on food advertising and public health. if we have those widgets to get of mechanics of advertising to work with

those social norms and aspirations the same way that the markers do it is just a matter of scale sore they forced to have free time for advertising? >> and to make the effort for healthy products and then invest the money. >> but it is a different direction to be effective and. >> a key concept is whether the advertising is misleading or deceptive or if for children that could be inherent you do not speak to that directly but i interested of your thoughts and research.

>> one says parts of a healthy diet to say if you give them this then children could read that to say it is the essential to a healthy diet but probably not. so there are some simple things like that. >> jennifer has written on that is inherently deceptive because of their inability to understand the commercial choice of intent signed this isn't sold on health of friendship and popularity here life will be better in many will be popular. that is very powerful if you understand that.

>> thinks so much to the three of you oat

>> good morning everyone and welcome to the institute. i'm the deputy director at the institute and i would like to welcome you both to the institute and to the center forr today's presentation on the 86% opinion polling in russia. i want to begin by thanking the cosponsor for today's event the institute for european, russian studies at george washington

university we are pleased they were able to cosponsor today's event and i would like to welcome c-span and we look forward to watching the program going forward. it remained high and the popularity rating is referred to as the 86% russia and the commentators that we are very pleased today to have the director of the center to come and talk about the popularity is. speaking today in a private capacity not as the director of the center among the other titles he is the editor-in-chief

of the magazine russian public opinion harold as well as a lecturer at the school of economics. he has won numerous awards and is the director of one of the major sources of independent public opinion and research in russia. it is my pleasure to introduce today speaking in russian so i ask foasked for those that need translation to use your headset. >> translator: how can you

ever conduct the poll -- for the pressure on the public opinion from all sides to undermine the system as well as the activists

[inaudible] because the very idea created the understanding that was going on. [inaudible]

[inaudible] every movement more frequently. it shows that it combines a number amherst into the country.

[inaudible] if you look for the last 20 years, you can see it drop in the 1990s. [inaudible]

its dramatic -- i'm sorry. >> translator: when putin came to power and said we are going to kill all our enemies [inaudible] later it depended on this to

conduct a however in the situation we are growing by about 30% a year. [inaudible] abruptly the regime can secure

it stability and we were observing a general situation with disappointment particularly emotional middle class all the way to [inaudible] it's radically changed. how does that work.

you can see that it was reaching the sentiments in the propaganda and later we have to compare with the lowest but this is the

total control. 40% said they don't like to see the putin candidacy and they are tired of waiting. let me remind you the demonstrations that came out

[inaudible] the party popularity there was the moment his slogans for supported by 45% right up to that credible and aggressive campaign and the annexation of crimea and the excitement.

the rating as you can see is all the way to 88% which perfectly matches. later he stay on the same level slightly decreasing. it was quite different because unlike the current crisis which is a systematic crisis and the

economic situation naturally [inaudible] by the time that putin came to power but they were controlling 26% of all now controls the state sector of the economy has

increased the number [inaudible] they dramatically change with the drop of the prices and income which reflects the middle-class [inaudible]

all of the trust of the government so in general it was the assessment about 13%. the [inaudible] it was a much more dramatic drop however it wasn't critical and it was transferred to the lower level of the government. you can see it goes down.

they provoke the legislators in the assessment roughly 62 to 30% but the most important thing is the western sentiment. so the ukraine propaganda i'm not going to analyze it because we won't have enough time there was not so much against ukraine but the policy of integration modeled from the human rights.

they were directed against the opposition [inaudible] this is a very important factor because [inaudible]

the policy was reinforced. they adopted a further civil society and introduced the persecution of the position. this is when the legislation was used to and they conduct the pro- u.s. policy in the channels of the so-called color revolutions.

[inaudible] speak to [inaudible] the negative approach the end of

friends was the political approach into this element is the very construction of the regime's and the ability to bring the society in because this is the goal of the domestic policy of kremlin. this doesn't mean that was

published [inaudible] few believe that it completed the provisions for one of the members of the style government. by the time it decreases again, a significant share of people

against putin [inaudible] baby it is correct to encourage bathat. but to me it is more significant and if it is true, the difference [inaudible]

the lives and country keep getting better. it's one of [inaudible] this is from a person that has learned from the oppressive state to lead with the state and to display loyalty but in reality to talk about his or her own personal problems. the strategy of the physical

survival and they have an idea of what their regime is about to. he is not even a monarch, therefore they have an idea about the regime system. as i said before, there's the propaganda that was brought to

the level of the great war. it raised the self assured us in self-confidence and we have shown everybody started to respect us. speak t [inaudible] it's jumped twice. it was extremely painful and

today was revealed the self assurance. [inaudible] if we look at the components it is in the national interest which is important because the activity is modest and in the

fight the economics goes down, which doesn't make it more popular. in all of this symbolic area there is the foreign policy. it's different in the environment of russia and the russian civilization against the rest of the world this makes sense to assess it [inaudible]

also to raise the level of the perceptions during the last few years we are dealing with a dramatic rebirth of many soviet ideas and perceptions and returned to threturnto the old l of the economy because it

secures the stability but also people do not remember but believe that it is some kind of guideline. it seems quite a model

[inaudible] the current system is less attractive. [inaudible] >> translator: there is no need to make professional comments but it's important the united states is the enemy number one in the framework in the struggle for russia and united states plays the role

brought back a here you can see the approach has grown a lot and the unfriendly nation was always led by the republics which opted for information then came ukraine.

[inaudible] [inaudible] it carries the burden to present

as a victim which allows the domestic policy to be an outside defender but what is also important is the best removes all the claims against the government and the need to be

patient and the most important factor here is we can enjoy everything as long as there is no major. this is the illustration and finally, in order to understand the [inaudible] dohowever, it is according to

creating the oppression and plays a more significant role in the international area in this brings respect from other nations. this is what people expected from putting. the most important element is the march [inaudible] anti-western confrontation. in the 1999, 65% felt the

southern tower that had been turned into the original power at the moment of this new propaganda in 2008 when there was the war of georgia or the annexation in the great power status and this dramatically increases the the economic and political issues. the changed the attitudes. my time is running out and

that's why i'm going to stop here. >> thank you very much. there is much to think about and numbers to contemplate about in your talk. i will ask the first question. my first question goes to the naturnature about the opinions e old soviet system and if you could address the question when you talk about the rising number of support i was curious if you

could identify when you talk about the support for the soviet system whether you could break that down by age groups. there's ththere is the support d system from those that live in the soviet system or is the support for the system equally spread among all areas of society including young people? [inaudible]

[inaudible] in this moment, our research is getting a strong number more than anybody else. it's from 7% to 54%. it was from the collective system pursued in a very medical fashion. after the crisis [inaudible]

it brought greater disappointment [inaudible] redirected a the union [inaudible] kept using this argument all the

time. the [inaudible] this number hasn't been changed for 25 years. [inaudible] more critical of those that lived at the end. young people who were not

familiar [inaudible] related to the idea of the superpower, and this is very significant to those in the remote provinces and therefore the [inaudible]

and it's also so c-span can get the feed as well so please identify yourself and speak into the microphone like i am right now. >> [inaudible] [inaudible]

[inaudible] [inaudible]

and one in particular is different. i believe that there is one to justify to understand our data if people do not take into account the elements. this is exactly like the united states. for me it is the transponders of a liberal journalist idea.

people are not shy or afraid to answer the. the. the society has been reasoned to which extent it has an impact but there are differences. for example, the technique gives 10% more regarding the face-to-face interview at then there is an element of trust and people start to look after the

[inaudible] however it is an opinion that anything when we ask are they afraid or not they've been from

about ten to 18%. therefore this is the problem and the collection of governing information. >> i would like to ask a question looking a bit into the future. one of the issues the government is facing is the need for the reform of the pension system

which is very generous by the international standards and extremely expensive given the russian government finances. they've proposed some significant restrictions on age and benefits. the tension is between the state and people in russia and it is the primary means by which much of the older population survives. if between now and the next presidential election there were a significant alteration in the system even announced they've not actuall actually apply actu, how do you think this would affect the broad public attitudes towards the state?

[inaudible] will be painful to words the population the number last year it was 4% and then with 16%.

they are going to survive at the expense of the regime as low. at the same time they are very slow in the replacement of the average wage that was about 70% and it is now 32% which it is hard to survive a. [inaudible] >> these bacteria defend short

questions. [laughter] steve crowley at the institute i just want to follow on the question how about the support for putin how does this breakdown by social group? we heard through the protest of the professional class folks in moscow and st. petersburg he seems to claim the support of the working class into the industrial hinterlands and so on. what does the data say?

>> speak of why do they accept? the first one was very interesting. under the environment of the regime. but the question is [inaudible]

there is a quarter that has no opinion. it was interesting to because there was a new trend that started from 2015 [inaudible]

[inaudible] the majority starts to fade aw away. there's this distinction of the so-called low intensity of the western sentiment that people are not willing to pay the price and if the situation is going to change dramatically come it can change very quickly.

[inaudible] it should make dramatic, radical breakup of the change and then everything is going to collapse and it will not play a role. people should become aware that it doesn't provide to bring back

the success of. did i answer the question [inaudible] it is in the circumstances. they support the robust age

group decreasing in this part. if we check the social segments. it was about 70 plus. this support was about 25, 28% and specifically the russian middle class ..

[inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible]

[inaudible] the russian they believed that they should say no russian troops in ukraine. in here the current situation ukraine was so efficient because there so many propaganda by the west. the propaganda was with the

language of world war ii the main symbol of the victory of the world war ii in 1945. and the third very important look what happened in ukraine. through the war in the battle the population has very horrific memories. this is a very significant reason. of course russia violates what international law but the key

punishment and therefore an ethical. therefore it is unethical act because russia restores its status by conducting ethical policy. it's not only people but also service of a system of protection of defense. therefore despite the fact that one other way official media say they're only volunteers there, people are perfectly aware that russian military the volunteers

were the troops fight their and this is the right thing because there were is the worst cheating in the war. >> trimmer questions but they must be very short. >> will very quickly respond to these because we are already past time. i see three handset. >> i like to ask in the context of the if you're defined as a foreign agent. >> with american propaganda being such a cornerstone of pollutants popularity, his

notion that president putin, i'm sorry president trump can make a deal to reset relations with russia fanciful. >> the last question in the back. >> so these are two questions of the we're done. >> will result or what outcome is more positive for russia. 52% 30% said trump would be better for russian only 9% spoke about clinton.

therefore the trump and prudent should be the successor putin. [inaudible] [inaudible] >> we have lost a court case. [inaudible] clearly and politically they ordered -- not going up against the civil defense and general asking against the national memorial another of these 48

were included. >> i think it was highly -- to play a role. but this also came a number because we did not yet receive any, we earn this money for research and our partner, the commercial company they did not do anything to do with the organization of which they will go by. the second would be the pressure in the region and environmental official throughout with our employees which blocks the

opportunity to come back and conducted number of projects which we had with russian. [inaudible] another relation with the worker, another words to ask the local administration. it's not only financial and finally, we are not going to apply to the registered and that means we are going to be honest again and to grow twice or three times and then it will be banned officially. so our forecasts is very bad.

i believe we still have half a year. so all of the putin. [inaudible] >> it was a fascinating conversation about what's going inside russia. [applause] >> i also want to thank our cosponsors, the institute for your pain russia and eurasia's studies, c-span and tall of you for coming. i wish you i wish you a happy thanksgiving. thank you much. [applause]

[ina