Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : MDA - Market Direction Analysis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Les H who wrote (65533)	12/31/2000 10:54:38 AM
From: Casaubon	Respond to of 99985

Good link. Thanks. IMO, patenting of genes does indeed impede the development of therapeutics for the associated disease. It establishes barriers to competetive research. This is fundamentally different than patenting a drug entity. When patenting drugs, companies can always do research to find a unique solution to a problem. Patenting the gene responsible for a disease is essentially equivalent to patenting the problem, instead of the solution. For this reason, I try to stick to companies working on actual solutions to problems, as opposed to so called enabling technologies. However, there is value in patenting techniques in manipulating genetic material. Of course, when betting dollars on such innovations, one always runs the risk of a competitor arriving at a better, more economical, technique. And isn't this the essence of inventing and the purpose of patentability?