Project 1999

Go Back   Project 1999 > General Community > Rants and Flames

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #11  
Old 06-14-2013, 05:49 PM
Ahldagor Ahldagor is offline
Planar Protector

Ahldagor's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 4,556
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nikon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
This will be the next part of the debate for more specific guidelines. Taking a gene, splicing out components, and inserting new components that do not occur naturally will constitute a synthetic gene (a synthetic allele of the natural gene). I have a close colleague that works in the gene therapy research field here in Colorado and this was his explanation. Technically, even though it is naturally occurring to start, once modified, it is an entirely new product and not a naturally occurring gene or allele, which then is patentable. While the laws of nature dictate how the nucleotide sequence works and reacts just like other genes, the newly created gene is not naturally occurring. This ruling sets the precedent that the genes (sequences) humans are born with cannot be patented, but lab-modified (custom) versions of the nucleotide sequences can be. The idea of patents in the US is to be able to protect something you 'create'. A modified gene, while resembling a naturally occurring gene with even slight variations, is in essence a new gene if it is not found in the human body. This is where it will get tricky when lab genes are passed onto offspring and somebody else owns the rights to that gene.

My understanding is that Myriad filed a patent claim for isolating a specific gene and recreating it in the lab then claiming it as their own. It was in essence the isolated gene itself that they were patenting as the gene does not occur naturally by itself, but rather as part of a whole. I'm not a biology expert and lean more towards lab chemistry and physics, but what was explained to me falls into line with my knowledge of American patent history and my bio-chem education.
so the argument is: it's different because we've synthesized one allele that would occur naturally from human action it can be patented because it (the allele) was synthesized from human action.

my gist of it anyway, and i could be wrong. looking at the set up and not specific points, but on a brighter note i think we're a few years away from fully privatizing the powers of a creator god...go humans?!?!
__________________
 


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:31 AM.


Everquest is a registered trademark of Daybreak Game Company LLC.
Project 1999 is not associated or affiliated in any way with Daybreak Game Company LLC.
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.