Jeff Fairman wrote:
> I guess the reason I tried to start this as a point of discussion is that
> the reaction (even among scientists) seems to be a knee-jerk one and not
> based on facts or with any thought to how such a change would affect the
> current development of therapeutic products. The majority of the proposals,
> given the pharmacoeconomics of the situation would wreck an industry that
> has served us pretty well.
>
It occurred to me while thinking about this thread that though Clinton (not
Gore btw), made a statement about patenting genes, the more conservative party
is generally slower to accept new technology and _also_ has a ludite,
right-wing religious element to deal with that could prove to be much more of
an impediment to the future of genomics than any misstatement by the
president. Doesn't this worry you a bit?
Doug
