Brought to you by U.S. District Judge Robert Sweet, who finally said what we were all thinking: the idea that you can patent human genes just because you were the first to find/identify it/them is not what patent law was meant for.
DNA helixes, hugely magnified
The ruling that[sic] could invalidate patents held on almost 20 percent of the human genome. There is a long-simmering debate within the biotech and scientific communities over whether it makes sense to patent genes. At this point, most scientists agree that patents on genes retard scientific innovation. When companies request a huge fee for somebody to develop medicines related to genes they own, it can cause real harm to people and researchers who can’t afford the pharmaceutical companies’ asking prices.
What other good news has crossed your path today?
Media Circus: Australia votes 2016 
96th Down Under Feminists Carnival 
Quick Hit: Beautiful portraits 
Quick Hit: Angry = Awesome 
Hoyden About Town 
More Good News For Science – Playing Pinball with Your Mind!
https://www.youtube.com/embed/O4TAATxWQMI?version=3&rel=1&fs=1&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&wmode=transparent
Good news on the DNA.
Good news?
For Melbourne Hoydens – Naomi Wolfe is giving a talk on her book The Beauty Myth on May 6th. Should be fun.
Talked to my lecturer yesterday – apparently I shouldn’t have any trouble applying for a phD in the next decade or so – computer games are very new as an academic area so there is a whole world out there to inflict research on.
The assignment I thought was simple is actually a technical nightmare, so I won’t be bored with lack of homework over the mid-semester break. Yaaaaaay.