Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Science

Malaria Genome Mapped 33

Posted by michael from the a-man-a-plan-a-canal dept.
kilaasi writes "A team of scientist have mapped the malaria-genome. 'After six years, Gardner and an international team have pieced together the DNA sequence of the tiny parasite Plasmodium falciparum that causes the majority of human malaria.' This does not imply that there is a cure at the moment, but it does give hope for a cure in the future. Regards Claus"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Malaria Genome Mapped More

Malaria Genome Mapped

Comments Filter:

  • Trying to be helpful? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Chris Canfield ( 548473 ) <slashdot@chrisca n f i e l d.net> on Thursday October 03, 2002 @08:18AM (#4379984) Homepage
    NPR was running a story [npr.org] about this earlier this morning. I can't open the above link as the terminal I am on cannot support realplayer, so forgive me if I mistake a few facts. However, what I do remember is that NPR's Dan Charles noted that Malaria is primarily a 3rd world nation disease and hardly ever attacks 1st world nations like the US and Great Britan. However, the likely outcome of any genomic research into the virus and an eventual cure could only be affordable to first-world countries, as designer drugs are notoriously expensive. He noted the cost of traditional malaria prevention methods, such as spraying stagnant water and pesticide-soaked sleeping nets, would be a few million dollars per year and would be enough to prevent the great majority of malaria cases. That cost would be less than the cost of another type of rare vaccination they mentioned in the US, and less than the cost of the genetic research which prompted this story.

    And I personally have to agree. The US and EU have unique positions as national superpowers with the ability to eradicate many of the world's ills, but with the system-wide problem that the only way these countries are set up to do so is through profit motivated reseach, not simple and unglamorous program implementation.

    • How true. It cost me £35 for malaria medicine for just a 2-3 week trip last time.
      I bet a lot of people there would have been glad to get £35 per month income.
      • Off-topic, I know, but I found your sig interesting. I saw a few documantaries about the Palistinians and looked up up more information. It's amazing: this is a people that has been suppressed and humiliated for more than 3000 years! It all began when the Israelites invaded the 'land of milk and honey' as described in the Bible. That is something to think about...
        • Indeed, wandering off-topic, but I've got karma to spare. :)

          Of course, you have to make up your own mind on who's right, but it's always a good idea to get several conflicting and contrasting stories before you do. And here, I offer some contrast. First, a couple [smh.com.au] of hospital stories [weeklystandard.com].

          And, to top it off, a column by an Arab-American, quoting from Arabic newspapers. Think it was the Jews that forced the Palestinians into refugee camps? Read this. [worldnetdaily.com] And another column [worldnetdaily.com] on history by the same guy.

          Don't take my word for it, though. And don't take the word of anyone else you read off of the 'net. Don't accept anything you learn as absolutely true unless you have researched it throughly, from every different angle and point of view there is, and you can integrate it, without contradiction, into the total sum of your existing knowledge.

    • I agree that there exist lower cost alternatives to creating a genetically-based cure for (as you stated) basically a 3rd world problem. In my mind the success or failure of this research to produce a workable vaccine is secondary to the experience and expertise in creating genetic vaccines gathered by the attempt. This may open doors for the sucessful treatment of other 1st world diseases that are otherwise impossible to treat.

      • One well-known and affordable existing technology for controlling malaria is the use of DDT to kill the mosquitos. Of course, this has the downside of thinning eggshells of birds of prey, which are high on the foodchain, to the point where the eggs can't survive to the point of hatching. So this leads to the thorny question, do we want to save some birds of prey from extinction, or save the lives of third world people? Current policy is, save the birds.
    • A maleria vaccine could greatly benefit the third world, if they ignore international IP laws. While designer drugs are hugely expensive, third world companies can produce them cheaply (lower labour costs, smaller profit margin, no massive overbloated marketing budget, no need to recoup R&D costs). The problem with this, is this is that it provides a disincentive for companies to perform research into 3rd world disease treatment. It's a tough situation, and I don't know the answer.

      However, I do agree with you, about traditional malaria prevention.
    • I also heard the NPR story. What I found most interesting was that the DNA of Malaria is made up almost entirely of T and A. Almost no C or G. This made it harder to sequence.

      Malaria is a very strange lifeform.

      • If this were true, this would make Malaria a "binary" lifeform, since the genome would be made up of only AT and TA pairs.

        I can see how this would make it hard to sequence; how do you know if the strand fragment you are messing with is upside down or not? (-;

    • In the short term, you're right. Intellectual property protections will, as usual, deny the third world the ability to afford these medications (unless they take steps to ignore the patent and make the drugs anyway).

      But patents are temporary. Eventually this knowledge can be worked into an affordable, open treatment as soon as science/pharma moves on to bigger and better things.

      It might take fifty years but the sequence of the genome is the first step in a long road to curing humanity's availability to the malaria parasite.
    • My father knows some folks who work in medical research, especially with regards to researching viruses and fighting diseases. Thing is, they're not motivated personally by a search for profit. They're motivated by a strange fascination with these horrible, horrible little things that can do so much damage to human life. (Kind of like my fascination with politicians....)

      However, research is expensive [slashdot.org]. So, researchers need investors. And investors don't have an unlimited amount of capital. They have to pick and choose which projects to invest in. To do this, they have to take several factors into consideration. Likelihood of actually getting something out of the research is a starting point. Usefulness of the product is another. And, of course, the likelihood of recouping their investment in a timely enough manner to invest in other projects. In other words, profit margin.

      And it's probably no coincidence that, in general, the most successful medical research generally comes out of the countries with the most freedom in the markets.
    • He noted the cost of traditional malaria prevention methods, such as spraying stagnant water and pesticide-soaked sleeping nets

      Yeah, that sounds real safe. We'll just douse everything we own in pesticides. I'm sure a malaria treatment would cost much less in the long run compared to the health problems from pesticide use.
    • With their positions as Interstate Superpowers, the US and EU also have the most restrictive effects in their applications of patent law. Since the US surpassed other nations global superpower, it really doesn't seem that we should be fighting so hard to be a global brain-drain at the cost of humanity... patents should be loosened, we are ahead of the game internationally.

      It seems that the whole patent's protecting the huge investment of corporate research is an effective strawman, allowing the first company to strike upon a useful solution to global ills to hold humanity in its grasp, extorting those who it claims to be be helping.

      It's not as if there isn't already significant interest in solving these problems. It's just unlikely that anybody else can beat a multibilliondollar corporation to the finish line, especially with the stifling portfolio of previous patents many of then have acquired. Perhaps independent, or or civic minded researcher could also come up with thereputic methods to cure disease, but not when they are competing with bottomless pits of money and influence.

      Sure, the huge corporation might come up with the cure earlier than more charitable "competition", but how it that a benefit if the solution is then withheld from the world for X years beyond the lifespan of the original patentholder. How many lifetimes is that when you consider the afflicted who can't afford to recompensate the behemoth researcher who withholds this aid from the rest of the world?

      Patents have multiplied almost as gemetrically as many pathogens, but they have outlifed their original, healthy purpose. Now they are a blight upon society, and should be eradicated.

      unfortuantely, it is much easier to control the populations of moquitoes than it is lawyers...

  • Oh great, mail order malaria (Score:3, Funny)

    by Henry V .009 ( 518000 ) on Thursday October 03, 2002 @08:56AM (#4380183) Journal
    Great, now everybody will be able to assemble malaria from scratch using internet mail-order DNA segments like was done with polio. Good going. Sequence some more deadly virus genomes while you're at it.
  • Perhaps /. needs a new Subject area, called Y10++, for stories about technological "breakthoughs" that will not (if ever) bring any actual benefit to anyone for at least 10 years, as is noted at the very end of article on this announcement in the Washington Post. I think these sorts of articles should be required to post some sort of warning message like "This information will probably never do you, nor anyone presently alive, any good." (Oddly, the Post's writers are withholding bylines toady in some sort of pre-strike action. Hate to say it, but I think the paper is vastly improved. Rather like a Generic paper, huh?)

    (Whatever)

    • Not true at all... (Score:4, Informative)

      by Angry Toad ( 314562 ) on Thursday October 03, 2002 @07:49PM (#4384577)

      There are very specific reasons why this particular genome sequence, while it may not benefit you personally, may alter or save the lives of millions of people within the next ten years.

      Relatively recently it was discovered that the malaria parasite contains a small, relict chloroplast [128.250.102.110]. This is big news. The choloroplast (for those of you rusty on your biology, the green thingy that plants use to put sunlight to use in making ATP, essentially the energy-storage molecule for life) is degenerate and certainly doesn't do photosynthesis anymore. On the other hand it appears that many of the chloroplast genes have transferred themselves into the Plasmodium genome and become intergrally linked into the metabolism of the parasite.

      Why is this a big deal? Because there are lots of chemicals around which kill plants by interfering with cholorplast metabolism, and which are simultaneously harmless to humans. This means a raft of new candidate cures for the disease.

      Many are already undergoing development. The publication of the Plasmoium genome means that it will be a (moderately) easy task to tease out a complete list of all the chloroplast-related genes which are involved in the metabolism of the parasite, and to expand the list of potential treatments even more based upon this information.

      • "Relatively recently it was discovered that the malaria parasite contains a small, relict chloroplast"

        This particular organelle is also called an apicoplast. Anyway -- one potentially interesting side effect of this development.

        There are quite a few third world nations that have trouble affording current anti-malarials (even when discounted or generically manufacturered). A lot of these chloroplast-targeting herbicides are relatively simple molecules, and are already manufactured in bulk quantities for very low prices (compared to medicines). If some of the current chloroplast-targeting herbicides are suitable as-is, then not only do we have a whole new class of drugs -- but some of them could be really cheap.

        Of course, if you want to manufacture them in an FDA-licensed, cGMP facility, that will jack up the price. But agricultural-quality material could be had for a few cents per treatment.
        • Hopefully the new treatments\preventatives will also avoid some of the nasty side effects of the quinine-derived versions, like mefloquine and chloroquine. Psychosis & liver failure, no thanks. I'm working in a region with frequent cases of malaria, and have stopped taking the pills for this reason, the long-term side effects of the medicines can be as bad as the disease itself. On the other hand no pills means doing a blood test every time flu-like symptoms appear is extremely prudent, though even on the antimalarials it's a good idea due to the many resistant strains.
  • 1. Quite a few posts here mention patents. Let me say this clearly: Patents on genomic DNA have nothing to do with Malaria. So please stop mixing the two.

    2. The problem with Malaria is that no pharma is going to look for a cure since there is no money to be made. So some public research is needed and some public research is being done. Unfortunately not enough. The last numbers I heard were something like 1000 times less than on Aids. Although Malaria kills about the same number of people. Not enough artists lobby governements for malaria research unfortunately.

    3. The good news is that things will probably change now. The Malaria parasite is absolutely facinating. It is partly plant partly animal, it is highly biased in its genomic composition (much more As and Ts than Gs and Cs) and hope is on the way. Herbicide drugs have already been tested and with better knowledge of its genome, we can kill the bastard. What is needed is more research, more rich governements awareness and some luck.

    4. I have had a pet idea for some years now and maybe one day someone will implement it. It is the following: Why not tax pharmas by asking them to do 1% (more or less) of their research on third-world diseases? They could for instance scan their huge chemical banks for cures for Malaria, Aids, ... That would cost little to them and may prove extremely valuable to all. Just a thought.
    • AIDS kills far more people in Africa than it does in the west, but the few 10s of thousands it does kill in the west are enough to warrent the expenditure of millions of $$ in search or a cure or drugs that lessen the effects of AIDS.

      The 2.2 Million people who die of AIDS in sub-saharan africa seldom have access to those drugs, although it is quite possible that future advancements will have a trikle-down effect.

      There is no such core group in the west to do the same thing for malaria that has been done for AIDS. Nobody except publicly funded benevolent organizations would be interested in investing.

      Michael
  • First world countries have almost non-existent population growthrates. What does that mean for their economies? Well it is arguable that if the amount of possible consumers do not grow, then your economy won't grow...

    So where are populations growing? Third world countries. Only problem is these countries will never reach their potential if life is a daily struggle against poverty, disease and hunger...

Slashdot Top Deals

If all the world's economists were laid end to end, we wouldn't reach a conclusion. -- William Baumol

Close