Human Trials Underway In China For SARS Vaccine

da_foz writes "A SARS vaccine has begun human trials in Beijing. The vaccine was devoloped with the help of some open source software, a couple details about what was used can be found here. Here is an interesting quote from the second link: 'The Director of the Genome Sciences Centre, Dr. Marco Marra, said he personally requested that his name not be included on the patent application as the scientist who found the genetic sequence. "This stems largely from a personal belief that DNA sequence is a discovery as opposed to an invention and should not be patentable," he said.'"

Patented Discoveries

[Alphanos]

"This stems largely from a personal belief that DNA sequence is a discovery as opposed to an invention and should not be patentable,"

Pfft. That's silly. Newton should've patented gravity:).

(For the humour-impaired: this is a joke:)

Re:Patented Discoveries

[martinX]

Hmmm, should this comment be moderated "informative"?

Philosophically, all is discovery

[Thinkit4]

The law of right triangles, the best of Mozart or Shakespeare, and the theory of gravity are all discoveries. Nobody creates an idea. All ideas, in all their forms, are discovered. It's just more obvious if it's an island, or DNA.

Primary Colors isn't enough

[Thinkit4]

More anonymous works.

Re:Philosophically, all is discovery

[Feztaa]

Well, the main difference between discovery and invention is that a discovery is something that already existed, that you found. An invention is something you thought up, that nobody ever thought of before.

I support his claim that discoveries should not be patentable.

This shocked the hell out of me

[7-Vodka]

Because I work at a company that is currently sending our SARS treatment to china. Our treatment is not a vaccine but rather a monoclonal antibody which would be administered post infection; and was indeed started with the sequence posted on the internet by these guys.
More details of this vaccine would be nice though.

An interesting irony

[the_other_one]

This is a CBC article about a Chinese vaccine for a disease that has killed relatively few people (statistically speaking).

Earlier today on CBC Radio One (Toronto 99.1) they were discussing the fact that it is illegal to import antiviral drugs into China for children with HIV. Even though there is not any Chinese manufacturer of such drugs.

Drug use must be rampant within the Chinese government beauracracy.

Re:An interesting irony

[the_other_one]

Ok now that I have RTFA this is not a Chinese vaccine.
However, this does not dilute the irony.

Re:An interesting irony

[Aglassis]

You said: "This is a CBC article about a Chinese vaccine for a disease that has killed relatively few people (statistically speaking)."

The only reason SARS has killed less than 1000 people is the quick action from health agencies. A Dec 2003 CDC Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report [cdc.gov] cites:

During November 2002--July 2003, a total of 8,098 probable SARS cases were reported to the World Health Organization (WHO) from 29 countries, including 29 cases from the United States; 774 SARS-related deaths (case-fatal

Re:An interesting irony

[the_other_one]

Thank ((insert deity)) for the health agencies.
The fact that SARS was controled as quickly as it was by quarantine was a major feather in their cap.

I do not find it ironic at all that so much effort is being put into research into SARS (or any other health matter) than HIV.

The point I was trying to make that it is ironic that this one experimental prevention vaccine for a disease that no one currently (officially) has. Has been imported into China and is being used on humans. People have been dying in mu

Re:An interesting irony

[mgs1000]

Of course, WHO didn't do a damn thing about SARS in Taiwan. Thank the CDC and the local authorities.

Re:An interesting irony

[nial-in-a-box]

You do raise a good point, unfortunately. It is sad how stupid China can be. They really aren't doing a terrible job, all things considered, but they could be doing much, much better if they stopped ruling with an iron fist. Not to be overly negative, but there's probably a good chance that (if your facts check out) the Chinese government is holding back treatments as a sick method of population control. Improbable, yes, but I'm sure it has at least crossed the minds of many leaders there.

Regarding the

Re:An interesting irony

[smoondog]

for a disease that has killed relatively few people (statistically speaking).

Yes, but it has the potential to be a very dangerous disease....

Gene patenting is outrageous

[Nomihn0]

I would liken it to the patenting of the value of pi. Imagine that. People could only use pi up to a certain significant digit because of a possible patent infringement. It is a derived, discovered, value. Genes, and pi, are simply observationsof the functioning of the universe. Unlike the similar JPEG problem, nothing in its own right is being created. Maybe entire synthetic genomes should be patentable, but certainly not any that occur naturally and are simply observed and decoded.

Ahuh...

[Anonymous Coward]

China's Xinhua news agency reported that four volunteers in Beijing received injections of the vaccine at the China-Japan Friendship Hospital over the weekend.

Xinhua? News?
China-Japan...Friendship?

It makes me wonder if the oxymoron overrides the reliability of the news. Especially as experts had predicted that it would take years to develop a SARS vaccine. Prove me wrong, Xinhua and I'll take it all back.

Don't Give Away Your Power

[osewa77]

The only way the director in question could make a difference is by being among the patent owners and working to make things freer, from within. It's like refusing to arm yourself in a rough neighbourhood because you "don't believe in violence".
________________
proud VDS user [seunosewa.com]

Patent Craziness

[bradkittenbrink]

initially posting the "source code" free to the community ... rather than seeking gene patent protection ... Unfortunately, they did not protect the code with an open source license, and now find themselves in a costly, distracting patent race

could someone explain this to me, how can any one patent something that I place in the public domain? Isn't my original release automatically prior art to their patent? Are they just hoping that it will be too costly for me to fight them? I guess I really know th