<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
xmlns:rawvoice="http://www.rawvoice.com/rawvoiceRssModule/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Representatives Introduce Bill to Stop Gene Patents</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/2007/02/13/represetatives-introduce-bill-to-stop-gene-patents/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/2007/02/13/represetatives-introduce-bill-to-stop-gene-patents/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=represetatives-introduce-bill-to-stop-gene-patents</link>
	<description>Freshly Brewed Bio/Pharma Chat. Served Up Daily.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 11:57:58 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrew Chin</title>
		<link>http://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/2007/02/13/represetatives-introduce-bill-to-stop-gene-patents/comment-page-1/#comment-3425</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrew Chin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Feb 2007 00:22:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/2007/02/13/represetatives-introduce-bill-to-stop-gene-patents/#comment-3425</guid>
		<description>I like to think that there are &quot;reasoned views&quot; worth hearing on both sides of the debate, especially since the legal status quo cannot be said to be the product of any public policy debate on the social costs and benefits of gene patents.  For more on this, please see my &lt;a href=&quot;http://voiceless.com/index.php?p=155&amp;more=1&amp;c=1&amp;tb=1&amp;pb=1#more155&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;blog&lt;/a&gt;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I like to think that there are &#8220;reasoned views&#8221; worth hearing on both sides of the debate, especially since the legal status quo cannot be said to be the product of any public policy debate on the social costs and benefits of gene patents.  For more on this, please see my <a href="http://voiceless.com/index.php?p=155&amp;more=1&amp;c=1&amp;tb=1&amp;pb=1#more155" rel="nofollow">blog</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stephen Albainy-Jenei</title>
		<link>http://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/2007/02/13/represetatives-introduce-bill-to-stop-gene-patents/comment-page-1/#comment-3350</link>
		<dc:creator>Stephen Albainy-Jenei</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Feb 2007 17:59:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/2007/02/13/represetatives-introduce-bill-to-stop-gene-patents/#comment-3350</guid>
		<description>Dave,

I understand your concerns. On the pricing, the original article states:

&quot;Myriad charges $2,975 -- raised in February from $2,760 -- for the complete testing of BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. But tests looking for single suspected mutations are priced as low as $400&quot;

Making the leap from one specific genetic test and saying it should be equivalent to the lowest priced test found on the market feels a little like claiming that &quot;a computer that could be sold for $1,000 now costs $3,000.&quot; Maybe they&#039;re not the same computer (or test).

Ed.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dave,</p>
<p>I understand your concerns. On the pricing, the original article states:</p>
<p>&#8220;Myriad charges $2,975 &#8212; raised in February from $2,760 &#8212; for the complete testing of BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. But tests looking for single suspected mutations are priced as low as $400&#8243;</p>
<p>Making the leap from one specific genetic test and saying it should be equivalent to the lowest priced test found on the market feels a little like claiming that &#8220;a computer that could be sold for $1,000 now costs $3,000.&#8221; Maybe they&#8217;re not the same computer (or test).</p>
<p>Ed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave</title>
		<link>http://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/2007/02/13/represetatives-introduce-bill-to-stop-gene-patents/comment-page-1/#comment-3342</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Feb 2007 16:22:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/2007/02/13/represetatives-introduce-bill-to-stop-gene-patents/#comment-3342</guid>
		<description>I have to say that as much as you complain that Crichton pulls numbers without reference (although, they are referenced in a former NY Times article linked on the same page) the idea that &quot;much research would never happen&quot; is blindly absurd.  The Human Genome Project is one of the largest undertakings in scientific research to date, and it was not promised or even made known the possibility of patentability of discoveries made therin.

It is absurd that a company can own a patent on a gene that naturally occurs in my body.  It is further absurd that I cannot donate for testing my own tissue if it contains a gene that is thusly patented.

Patents on genes are scary and nothing more than government-created monopolies on naturally occuring material.  No invention or discovery of a non-obvious nature was made, and discovery of said genes all rest on the contributory work of the Human Genome Project.

Patentability of genes must be squashed immediately, or we&#039;ll be the only country in the world respecting such absurd patents.  Europe is already overturning them, Canada and other countries are ignoring them, and we&#039;ll find ourselves even further behind other countries in science than we already do.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have to say that as much as you complain that Crichton pulls numbers without reference (although, they are referenced in a former NY Times article linked on the same page) the idea that &#8220;much research would never happen&#8221; is blindly absurd.  The Human Genome Project is one of the largest undertakings in scientific research to date, and it was not promised or even made known the possibility of patentability of discoveries made therin.</p>
<p>It is absurd that a company can own a patent on a gene that naturally occurs in my body.  It is further absurd that I cannot donate for testing my own tissue if it contains a gene that is thusly patented.</p>
<p>Patents on genes are scary and nothing more than government-created monopolies on naturally occuring material.  No invention or discovery of a non-obvious nature was made, and discovery of said genes all rest on the contributory work of the Human Genome Project.</p>
<p>Patentability of genes must be squashed immediately, or we&#8217;ll be the only country in the world respecting such absurd patents.  Europe is already overturning them, Canada and other countries are ignoring them, and we&#8217;ll find ourselves even further behind other countries in science than we already do.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Served from: www.patentbaristas.com @ 2012-02-12 20:39:55 -->
