Forgive us for the hiatus as we do not have internet access in our summer apartment. We also don't have air-conditioning. We don't have television, washing machines, or even a properly working shower. All-in-all, we're having quite a wonderful time...
Second week working in the lab and already I'm exhausted. I have no new ideas and I feel incompetent. Hours just drag away and there's still no internet at home. So, to where shall I turn?
I guess I don't have much to write at the moment, especially since I don't have any thoughts going through my head that I can grab and keep down for more than three seconds...
May all of your dreams come true.
Thursday, June 28, 2007
Saturday, June 23, 2007
The patent threat to designer biology
http://www.nature.com/news/2007/070618/pf/070618-17_pf.html
muse@nature.com: The patent threat to designer biology:
Behind scare stories of building synthetic life lies the issue of who owns the biological parts.
Philip Ball
"For the first time, God has competition", claimed the Action Group on Erosion, Technology and Concentration (ETC Group) two weeks ago. With this catchy headline, it aimed to raise the alarm about a patent on "the world's first-ever human-made species", a bacterium allegedly created "with synthetic DNA" in the laboratories of the Venter Institute in Rockville, Maryland.ETC had discovered a US patent application filed last October by scientists from the Venter Institute for what the scientists claim are the 381 essential genes needed to make an organism. The genes are found in Mycoplasma genitalium, a naturally slimmed-down microbe that has just 485 genes that encode proteins.The action group seemed to be confused about whether the synthetic bacterium, which they dubbed 'Synthia', had actually been made. It hasn't — yet. But beyond the seemingly scary notion that a man-made bug is lurking in a lab somewhere, ETC was concerned that someone might be able to patent it.If the patent were granted, anyone wanting to design an organism from these genes would need to apply for a license. "These monopoly claims signal the start of a high-stakes commercial race to synthesize and privatize synthetic life forms," claimed ETC's Jim Thomas. "Will Venter's company become the 'Microbesoft' of synthetic biology?"Now, that's a better question (if posed rather hyperbolically). I'm told by scientists in the field that the patent application has little chance of success, but it does raise an important issue. Patenting of genes has been a controversial matter for many years, but the advent of synthetic biology takes the debate to a new level.Living devicesIt is arguably a distortion of the idea of 'invention' to patent genes that exist in nature, even if the patenter has worked out how to use it for a particular application. But if you can start to make new 'devices' by arranging these genes in new ways, doesn't that qualify? And if so, how small and rudimentary a 'part' becomes patentable?Scientists gathered in Greenland last week at a meeting called "The merging of bio and nano — towards cyborg cells" were well placed to address such questions. At that conference, supported by the Kavli Foundation in Oxnard, California, Drew Endy of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge admitted that the intellectual-property framework for synthetic biology remains unresolved. Endy and his colleagues are creating a 'Registry of Standard Biological Parts' to be used as the elements of genetic circuitry just like the transistors, capacitors and so forth in electronics catalogues. This registry places the parts in the public domain, which can provide some protection against attempts to patent them.
A bacterial camera: Could advances like these soon be blocked by patenting?Researchers have already organized 'cassettes' of natural genes into modules that can be inserted into microbial genomes to give the organisms new types of behaviour — such as making them flash on and off with light1, or acting like photographic film2. Such efforts would be impossibly expensive and slow, Endy says, if the intellectual-property rights on all the components had to be cleared first. It would be as if, he says, you had to apply for a license to use every command instruction in a piece of computer code.In synthetic biology, that sort of patenting seems disturbingly easy right now. "You can take any device from the Texas instruments TTL catalogue, put 'genetically coded' in front of it without actually demonstrating it in practice, and you have a good chance of getting a patent," says Endy.Help not hinderPatenting has been a brake on the useful applications of biotechnology, according to bioengineer Jay Keasling of the University of California, Berkeley, who was also at the Greenland meeting. Keasling has been working for several years to engineer microbes to synthesize a compound called artemisinin — one of the best available drugs for fighting malaria3.When the ETC Group dismisses efforts to use synthetic biology to address global problems as one of their marketing strategies, I think they are grossly misjudging the researchers and their motives. Keasling wants to use it to save malaria victims. And One of Venter's goals is to use his microbes to provide cheap biofuels as a replacement for oil.But ETC may be right that patenting is a bad idea in this field. "If you want to have a community sharing useful and good parts, 20 years of patent protection is obviously not helpful," says Sven Panke of the ETH in Zürich, Switzerland, one of the organizers of the third Synthetic Biology conference being held there next week. "It would be very helpful if we could find a good way to reward but not impede."Legal experts too agree that something needs be done. "Synthetic biology presents a particularly revealing example of a difficulty that the law has frequently faced over the past 30 years — the assimilation of a new technology into... existing intellectual-property rights," wrote Arti Rai and James Boyle, from Duke University in North Carolina, in a recent paper4. "The way that US law has handled software on the one hand and biotechnology on the other could come together in a 'perfect storm' that would impede the potential of the technology."Copyright might provide an alternative way to reward innovative scientists. Or some form of novel legal framework. But no one is sure what will work best. Intellectual property is prominently on the agenda at the upcoming Swiss conference. "We are going to take a look at the issue," Panke says. "But we will not solve it. In Europe we are just starting to appreciate the problem."
muse@nature.com: The patent threat to designer biology:
Behind scare stories of building synthetic life lies the issue of who owns the biological parts.
Philip Ball
"For the first time, God has competition", claimed the Action Group on Erosion, Technology and Concentration (ETC Group) two weeks ago. With this catchy headline, it aimed to raise the alarm about a patent on "the world's first-ever human-made species", a bacterium allegedly created "with synthetic DNA" in the laboratories of the Venter Institute in Rockville, Maryland.ETC had discovered a US patent application filed last October by scientists from the Venter Institute for what the scientists claim are the 381 essential genes needed to make an organism. The genes are found in Mycoplasma genitalium, a naturally slimmed-down microbe that has just 485 genes that encode proteins.The action group seemed to be confused about whether the synthetic bacterium, which they dubbed 'Synthia', had actually been made. It hasn't — yet. But beyond the seemingly scary notion that a man-made bug is lurking in a lab somewhere, ETC was concerned that someone might be able to patent it.If the patent were granted, anyone wanting to design an organism from these genes would need to apply for a license. "These monopoly claims signal the start of a high-stakes commercial race to synthesize and privatize synthetic life forms," claimed ETC's Jim Thomas. "Will Venter's company become the 'Microbesoft' of synthetic biology?"Now, that's a better question (if posed rather hyperbolically). I'm told by scientists in the field that the patent application has little chance of success, but it does raise an important issue. Patenting of genes has been a controversial matter for many years, but the advent of synthetic biology takes the debate to a new level.Living devicesIt is arguably a distortion of the idea of 'invention' to patent genes that exist in nature, even if the patenter has worked out how to use it for a particular application. But if you can start to make new 'devices' by arranging these genes in new ways, doesn't that qualify? And if so, how small and rudimentary a 'part' becomes patentable?Scientists gathered in Greenland last week at a meeting called "The merging of bio and nano — towards cyborg cells" were well placed to address such questions. At that conference, supported by the Kavli Foundation in Oxnard, California, Drew Endy of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge admitted that the intellectual-property framework for synthetic biology remains unresolved. Endy and his colleagues are creating a 'Registry of Standard Biological Parts' to be used as the elements of genetic circuitry just like the transistors, capacitors and so forth in electronics catalogues. This registry places the parts in the public domain, which can provide some protection against attempts to patent them.
A bacterial camera: Could advances like these soon be blocked by patenting?Researchers have already organized 'cassettes' of natural genes into modules that can be inserted into microbial genomes to give the organisms new types of behaviour — such as making them flash on and off with light1, or acting like photographic film2. Such efforts would be impossibly expensive and slow, Endy says, if the intellectual-property rights on all the components had to be cleared first. It would be as if, he says, you had to apply for a license to use every command instruction in a piece of computer code.In synthetic biology, that sort of patenting seems disturbingly easy right now. "You can take any device from the Texas instruments TTL catalogue, put 'genetically coded' in front of it without actually demonstrating it in practice, and you have a good chance of getting a patent," says Endy.Help not hinderPatenting has been a brake on the useful applications of biotechnology, according to bioengineer Jay Keasling of the University of California, Berkeley, who was also at the Greenland meeting. Keasling has been working for several years to engineer microbes to synthesize a compound called artemisinin — one of the best available drugs for fighting malaria3.When the ETC Group dismisses efforts to use synthetic biology to address global problems as one of their marketing strategies, I think they are grossly misjudging the researchers and their motives. Keasling wants to use it to save malaria victims. And One of Venter's goals is to use his microbes to provide cheap biofuels as a replacement for oil.But ETC may be right that patenting is a bad idea in this field. "If you want to have a community sharing useful and good parts, 20 years of patent protection is obviously not helpful," says Sven Panke of the ETH in Zürich, Switzerland, one of the organizers of the third Synthetic Biology conference being held there next week. "It would be very helpful if we could find a good way to reward but not impede."Legal experts too agree that something needs be done. "Synthetic biology presents a particularly revealing example of a difficulty that the law has frequently faced over the past 30 years — the assimilation of a new technology into... existing intellectual-property rights," wrote Arti Rai and James Boyle, from Duke University in North Carolina, in a recent paper4. "The way that US law has handled software on the one hand and biotechnology on the other could come together in a 'perfect storm' that would impede the potential of the technology."Copyright might provide an alternative way to reward innovative scientists. Or some form of novel legal framework. But no one is sure what will work best. Intellectual property is prominently on the agenda at the upcoming Swiss conference. "We are going to take a look at the issue," Panke says. "But we will not solve it. In Europe we are just starting to appreciate the problem."
Thursday, June 14, 2007
Thanateros, Thou Double-Headed God-Figure
Death and sex. Sex and death. I have invoked these two deities and since then, I have yet to free myself from their torment. They have plagued my every day thoughts and they creep up on me, taunting me at my inability to attain any distance on either of them. I am denied sex, so I wish to die. Death refuses me, so I am forced to seek comfort through sex. Lovely.
I'll admit, it's not as melodramatic as I put it. I'm probably writing this only because I am currently sitting at Hallowed Grounds and an extremely attractive guy in a red shirt is sitting right next to me (he can't read it what I am typing and even if he could, he's too busy discussing black metal with my friend). As usual, I'm sulking in the background, pretending to be invisible, or failing to play the role of the demure temptress. Finding men is an extremely difficult task for me, considering the percentage of men attracted to males is not anywhere near a fifth of the population of men, and those that are seek some youthful Apollo, not this gorgon with an extremely foul attitude (don't forget, the flaaaabs of fat). I have attempted to go through the entire "accept yourself for who you are" facade promoted by pop psychology and the self-help industry. I've even done away with any standards, because then I'd be "too selective" and weed out "potential great guys." Riiiight. First of all, I might have high standards, but men who are attracted to men tend to have outrageous standards, or at least standards that I cannot meet.
Let us break this down into the choices that will generate the extremely low probability of my finding an attractive man who is also attracted to me (or just any man attracted to me at all).
-Condition 1: Men who are attracted to men. Self-explanatory.
-Condition 2: Men who are attracted to Asian males. An extremely daunting parameter, seeing as how the construction of homosexuality is extremely European.
-Condition 3: Men who are attracted to non-anorexic Asian males. Let's face it, Asians are, in general, pretty slim. Besides, I'm probably fatter than the average American as it is.
-Condition 4: Men who are attracted to men and do not attack non-Socialists. The "gay" identity is constructed on progressivism and a radical sense of egalitarianism to the point of forcing collectivism. The position of the so-called "gay" community is pretty left-leaning, so libertarians like me wouldn't really be welcome (or, rather, their rabid socialism wouldn't really be welcome to playful discourse, considering how they get all huffy and puffy at the slightest hint of otherificationization or whatever those PoMosexuals love to say nowadays).
These first four conditions will undoubtedly slim down the selection pool by quite a bit. In fact, choosing a significance parameter of 0.05 (I know that this is abusing statistical theory, but you get my point), these four conditions alone make it impossible to find men who gave even the slightest bit of probability to be attracted to me, and this statistic is based on the most superficial of things--I thought it would've been too depressing to see what the probability would be if I added "tolerant to my talking" to the conditions.
__________________________________________________________
It is officially two weeks since I first started this post (I started the post on 31 May, 2007--during which time, I have learned that the person I was gawking at was actually awkwardly trying to flirt with my friend and they ended up on an awkward date with an awkward ending that allows for me to make fun of my friend and bring up the whole awkwardness of the situation over and over and over again), and I still have much to complain about. I add here my complaints regarding the foibles of online dating. eHarmony is geared towards evangelical Christians and God knows I cannot afford the monthly premiums of personals and dating services online, so I have turned to Craigslist. Unfortunately, there are more ass and dick pictures littered across than face pictures, and the typical post reads:
Me: [Insert Height Here], [Insert Weight Here], [Insert Waist Size Here], GWM, VGL, athletic, hung, [Insert Inflated Cock Size Here], horny as hell, d/d free (u be to.)
You: Hot, inshape, no fats, no femmes
Um... right. I guess I have no right to complain; obviously some people regard physical stature as more important than intelligence. I have to admit, if I didn't say that looks were important, I'd be a hypocrite. But this entire deal is making me want to tear my hair out. I know what the solution is--go to the gym, drop 50 pounds, look fabulous, and get a tan (and who says that skin cancer runs in my family?) Yet, why do I have the feeling that this is not the only thing I have to work on?
Maybe it is the whole physical body thing. I've hated my weak constitution for as long as I can remember. I'm not morbidly obese, but I can't really say that I'm the gymnast I used to be. Truth be told, I enjoy this sedentary lifestyle because there is something soothing about hating the way you look and doing more to make sure that you become even more miserable. What makes it worse is the fact that I'm not that bad of an athlete--I love to hike, bike, run, and kick some ass. However, that perfectionist bit of my inner dialogue starts telling me that I'm not cut out for it and that I should just quit because I know that I won't be able to perform at the level that I'm supposed to (whatever the hell that level is). This self-hatred is something that I feel extremely confused about--I don't know if it makes me attractive or more repugnant. I guess a lot of it has to stem from the fact that I'm used to seeing romantic leads with low self-esteem and a somewhat cynical worldview and somehow in the movies it works out into some elaborate Cinderella story, in which I finally open my eyes and run after the man that was chasing after me, after a buildup of sexual tension ever since his stormy entrance which was indulged in during a night of revelry, followed by awkward silence, then a melodramatic confrontation. Yep, I know what kind of a relationship I want--it comes from watching too many Sandra Bullock movies.
I don't know why I'm even publishing this, considering it's not really that much of an academic ranting than it is a personal bloc of bitch, but I guess I'm continuing with it because somehow it helps me organize my thoughts. Hopefully I can find that half-Jew, half-Irish raised Catholic anthropology doctorate who joined the police force somewhere... But I really doubt things turn out the way you envision them. Maybe I'll be pleasantly surprised. Maybe.
I'll admit, it's not as melodramatic as I put it. I'm probably writing this only because I am currently sitting at Hallowed Grounds and an extremely attractive guy in a red shirt is sitting right next to me (he can't read it what I am typing and even if he could, he's too busy discussing black metal with my friend). As usual, I'm sulking in the background, pretending to be invisible, or failing to play the role of the demure temptress. Finding men is an extremely difficult task for me, considering the percentage of men attracted to males is not anywhere near a fifth of the population of men, and those that are seek some youthful Apollo, not this gorgon with an extremely foul attitude (don't forget, the flaaaabs of fat). I have attempted to go through the entire "accept yourself for who you are" facade promoted by pop psychology and the self-help industry. I've even done away with any standards, because then I'd be "too selective" and weed out "potential great guys." Riiiight. First of all, I might have high standards, but men who are attracted to men tend to have outrageous standards, or at least standards that I cannot meet.
Let us break this down into the choices that will generate the extremely low probability of my finding an attractive man who is also attracted to me (or just any man attracted to me at all).
-Condition 1: Men who are attracted to men. Self-explanatory.
-Condition 2: Men who are attracted to Asian males. An extremely daunting parameter, seeing as how the construction of homosexuality is extremely European.
-Condition 3: Men who are attracted to non-anorexic Asian males. Let's face it, Asians are, in general, pretty slim. Besides, I'm probably fatter than the average American as it is.
-Condition 4: Men who are attracted to men and do not attack non-Socialists. The "gay" identity is constructed on progressivism and a radical sense of egalitarianism to the point of forcing collectivism. The position of the so-called "gay" community is pretty left-leaning, so libertarians like me wouldn't really be welcome (or, rather, their rabid socialism wouldn't really be welcome to playful discourse, considering how they get all huffy and puffy at the slightest hint of otherificationization or whatever those PoMosexuals love to say nowadays).
These first four conditions will undoubtedly slim down the selection pool by quite a bit. In fact, choosing a significance parameter of 0.05 (I know that this is abusing statistical theory, but you get my point), these four conditions alone make it impossible to find men who gave even the slightest bit of probability to be attracted to me, and this statistic is based on the most superficial of things--I thought it would've been too depressing to see what the probability would be if I added "tolerant to my talking" to the conditions.
__________________________________________________________
It is officially two weeks since I first started this post (I started the post on 31 May, 2007--during which time, I have learned that the person I was gawking at was actually awkwardly trying to flirt with my friend and they ended up on an awkward date with an awkward ending that allows for me to make fun of my friend and bring up the whole awkwardness of the situation over and over and over again), and I still have much to complain about. I add here my complaints regarding the foibles of online dating. eHarmony is geared towards evangelical Christians and God knows I cannot afford the monthly premiums of personals and dating services online, so I have turned to Craigslist. Unfortunately, there are more ass and dick pictures littered across than face pictures, and the typical post reads:
Me: [Insert Height Here], [Insert Weight Here], [Insert Waist Size Here], GWM, VGL, athletic, hung, [Insert Inflated Cock Size Here], horny as hell, d/d free (u be to.)
You: Hot, inshape, no fats, no femmes
Um... right. I guess I have no right to complain; obviously some people regard physical stature as more important than intelligence. I have to admit, if I didn't say that looks were important, I'd be a hypocrite. But this entire deal is making me want to tear my hair out. I know what the solution is--go to the gym, drop 50 pounds, look fabulous, and get a tan (and who says that skin cancer runs in my family?) Yet, why do I have the feeling that this is not the only thing I have to work on?
Maybe it is the whole physical body thing. I've hated my weak constitution for as long as I can remember. I'm not morbidly obese, but I can't really say that I'm the gymnast I used to be. Truth be told, I enjoy this sedentary lifestyle because there is something soothing about hating the way you look and doing more to make sure that you become even more miserable. What makes it worse is the fact that I'm not that bad of an athlete--I love to hike, bike, run, and kick some ass. However, that perfectionist bit of my inner dialogue starts telling me that I'm not cut out for it and that I should just quit because I know that I won't be able to perform at the level that I'm supposed to (whatever the hell that level is). This self-hatred is something that I feel extremely confused about--I don't know if it makes me attractive or more repugnant. I guess a lot of it has to stem from the fact that I'm used to seeing romantic leads with low self-esteem and a somewhat cynical worldview and somehow in the movies it works out into some elaborate Cinderella story, in which I finally open my eyes and run after the man that was chasing after me, after a buildup of sexual tension ever since his stormy entrance which was indulged in during a night of revelry, followed by awkward silence, then a melodramatic confrontation. Yep, I know what kind of a relationship I want--it comes from watching too many Sandra Bullock movies.
I don't know why I'm even publishing this, considering it's not really that much of an academic ranting than it is a personal bloc of bitch, but I guess I'm continuing with it because somehow it helps me organize my thoughts. Hopefully I can find that half-Jew, half-Irish raised Catholic anthropology doctorate who joined the police force somewhere... But I really doubt things turn out the way you envision them. Maybe I'll be pleasantly surprised. Maybe.
Friday, June 8, 2007
FREEEEDOOOOMMMM!!!!!
Well, for about a week. Then I return to Hyde Park to work over the summer--then I'll probably know whether or not I will continue in chemistry.
Finals are over (sort of--my biophysics professor still needs to send me back comments on second drafts of the final papers) and I'm all moved out. I woke up at seven AM and got done at nine PM. No time for breaks. I haven't even eaten yet, so food sounds exciting. I will write more when I'm less emotionally turbulent.
Finals are over (sort of--my biophysics professor still needs to send me back comments on second drafts of the final papers) and I'm all moved out. I woke up at seven AM and got done at nine PM. No time for breaks. I haven't even eaten yet, so food sounds exciting. I will write more when I'm less emotionally turbulent.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
