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 : China Warehouse- More Than Crockery -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: RealMuLan who wrote (3612)	10/31/2004 8:36:07 PM
From: RealMuLan	Respond to of 6370

GMOs may save Third World News clipping assistance is courtesy of Ellinghuysen.com MONTREAL - Leading edge science could be the salvation of the developing world. Medical developments at the molecular level could improve infant mortality numbers, offer better diagnoses for diseases like HIV-AIDS and malaria and deliver effective vaccines derived from plants such as potatoes or alfalfa. "In every region of the world there are two to three countries that are really innovative. The other 20 or 30 do not have a high level of technology and are learning from the two or three," said Dr. Peter Singer, professor of medicine at the University of Toronto. Taking science to the people and blending it with common practices could end suffering from disease, poverty and infant mortality, he told a science writers meeting in Montreal. An example is a malaria vaccine used in combination with mosquito netting around beds to combat a disease responsible for killing millions each year. Or, added his colleague Abdallah Daar, consider that there are 20 candidate vaccines for HIV and all are a result of biotechnology. "Some of the problems of the developing world can only be solved by biotechnology. HIV is a good example," Daar said. These concepts are part of the United Nations-led Millennium Project established in 2000 as a set of targets for developing countries to reach by 2015. The project aims to reduce extreme poverty and hunger, provide universal primary education, reduce infant mortality, reverse the spread of HIV-AIDs, improve access to safe drinking water and ensure environmental sustainability. The project's science and technology chapter hopes to harness genetics to help developing countries with molecular diagnostics, recombinant vaccines and drug and vaccine delivery. Molecular diagnostics can detect the presence of a pathogen at the cellular level by finding certain proteins in the patient's blood or tissues. Infectious and parasitic diseases are responsible for about 40 percent of the 17 million deaths in the developing world each year. The three major diseases are HIV-AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis. Rapid diagnosis at the molecular level improves chances of survival and ensures that correct treatments are administered. Genetically modified vaccines can be replicated quickly. In some cases they have improved storage characteristics and may not have to be refrigerated. Some of these vaccines are plant derived. For example, a vaccine derived from potatoes has been shown to increase immunity in mice. Plant-derived vaccines are being developed for diseases affecting young children, particularly measles and diarrhea. Singer said there are already success stories. China was the first country in the world to license gene therapy for certain types of cancer. Cuba has produced the world's only meningitis B vaccine. Another project is looking at using biotechnology to filter arsenic from well water in Bangladesh with genetically modified bacteria. While costs are declining, more funds are needed to keep these projects operating. Canada recently announced it would contribute $1 billion to government research and development in developing countries. In Canada, about $22 billion is devoted to research and development. truthabouttrade.org

To: RealMuLan who wrote (3612)	10/31/2004 9:10:45 PM
From: RealMuLan	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6370

To screen or not to screen A medical breakthrough in genetics and an ethical dilemma Cystic fibrosis, Duchenne muscular dystrophy and Huntington’s disease are among the most terrible illnesses that a human being can endure. All are caused by a genetic defect. Victims are usually struck down early and lead short, painful lives. Almost invariably, there is no cure. The discovery, therefore, of a successful technique to screen embryos to identify these diseases is one of the clear miracles of bio-engineering that has brought huge relief to worried parents and could, eventually, prevent a vast amount of suffering. The technique, called pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD), consists of removing a cell from an embryo, testing it for any genetic abnormality then implanting the embryo in the womb — provided that it is clear of the defects that could trigger these diseases. Permitted under strict guidelines laid down by the Human Fertilisation and Embyrology Authority, PGD is, in Britain, allowed only for a narrow range of conditions, and its use must, in each instance, have formal medical sanction. For the technique is still controversial. It is not just the ethical objections to discarding an embryo found to be damaged; the technique raises the whole issue of “designer babies” and could be the slippery slope that leads to the abuse of sex selection or the birth of babies with chosen genetic characteristics. Those fears may now be heightened by the landmark ruling to allow PGD to be used for patients with a genetic form of bowel cancer and by the likely application to extend the procedure to breast cancer. These diseases, though causing widespread suffering to many people, fall into a different category. Both can be caused by faulty DNA, but not all those inheriting the gene fall ill. Some of those who do can be cured; others can opt for pre-emptive mastectomy. The onset is generally later in life, allowing many patients to enjoy years of normal health. This is even more the case with Alzheimer’s, which does not occur until late in life. Will parents really want to deny their child life because an embryo tested positive for a genetic trigger? The numbers involved will be small, as few women would opt for a technique as invasive and expensive as PGD without good reason. In theory, strict regulation means that decisions are taken only after debate informed by the expertise of doctors. But that very expertise may change the debate again by finding cures for debilitating disease. In Britain, the technique is unlikely to be misused. In other countries this may not be so. In India or China, for example, the societal pressures to produce male babies could be so overwhelming that a doctor could connive in selecting embryos according to sex rather than screening for genetic defects. There will always be the difficulty of where to draw the line. Which disease is serious enough for parents to screen? What about a history of mental illness? Parents have a profound responsibility, as does the medical profession. PGD has the potential to prevent incalculable suffering; it must be very selectively used, not abused. timesonline.co.uk