I take your point regarding the market/business experience, and I appreciate the comment. My understanding is that the board is required (though maybe in a loose sense) to have the kind of expertise he brings to bear.

However, I have to echo Downie's concerns about the choice of a Pfizer exec. Pfizer has recently been found guilty of very serious ethical transgressions, having to do particularly with the manner in which they conduct their research (e.g. misleadingly manipulating results to make their drugs appear useful when the data does not support it), and bring their drugs to market (e.g. suggesting they be prescribed for "off-label" uses). These types of transgressions relate directly to the very specific qualifications that an industry representative would be asked to provide to the board.

Given that Pfizer's track record is highly dubious in that regard, it seems a better appointment would have come from another industry leader.

Can't wait!