Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
mingwan,
Would you keep them in custody while the test is being run? If not then how will you catch up with the ones that fail the test? Preumably having entered the country for nefarious reasons they are not going to hang around.
Would you test everyone, or just a sample? What percentage of the countless visitors every day will you test? A significant fraction would be very unwieldy, but a small sample would be easy to circumvent.
Sorry, doesn't seem feasible.
mingwan, Damn, that's embarassing.
You know, as I wrote it I did a mental 'take' thinking I don't want to screw this up again, and then I did it anyway.
Rest assured that homeland security knows.
I'm not sure what you mean by this,
"Perhaps there are potential applications related to e.g. cross-checking ancestry against self-reported geographical origin for visa applicants?"
Are you suggesting that visa applicants will need to send a dna sample with their visa application?
I doubt that is feasible. It would seem likely that someone willing to lie about his GEOGRAPHICAL origins would be capable of providing an equally false but congruent sample.
regards,
frog
bag,
Let's hope so.
Unfortunately, they have taken advantage of 'situations' before so we will have to wait and see this time.
mingwan,
re
"I wonder whether we might also see another follow-on announcement related to usage of the test from another agency..."
Hopefully there is something more to substantiate this tack. If not it has a whiff of desperation to it. The increased confidence in the test and the improved ability to differentiate geographical origins is definitely a positive achievement, but to spin it into the war on terrorism seems a bit drastic.
Can you envision a scenario in which it would have any value?
These aren't crimes that tend to leave DNA at the crime scene, unless of course it is the body of the suicide bomber himself, in which case the value of the test is moot. After such a crime it is quite evident who the perpetrators were by the claims made by in the press by the terrorists themselves. Anyone from the geological regions in question who is even remotely suspicious is already being tracked by homeland security.
I hope there is something to your premise, because if it is merely an attempt to leverage the present crisis, then it looks weak.
regards,
frog
carter,
The simple answer is, no.
While it may be technically possible, the odds against DNAP achieving it in this time frame are fairly astronomical. The obstacles would seem to be insurmountable given the present conditions. Lottery tickets are more promising.
gunnabeoneday,
I don't know what it means.
Does, "one in every car" mean the sample kit (a q-tip and a plastic bag) or will they pre-purchased an 'analysis' to be used at a later date?
I am under the impression that forensic analysis is done by a team of specialists who bring their own equipment (fingerprint tools, evidence kits etc.) and that the normal patrol officers are trained not to touch anything for fear of contaminating the evidence and the evidence gathering process. (at least that's how they do it in the movies. )
As a venue for speculative day dreams, I suppose the concept has some attraction, but for any realistic analysis there are many questions that need to be answered first.
regards,
frog
They have his age from the eyewitnesses who have seen him. As well as his description and his clothing. Thewy even have an idea of the city he might live in from things he has said to his victims. The value of the information provided by DNAP is specific to his cultural heritage, as it may direct them to the neighborhood or ethnic group that might narrow the search.
While the information is exciting and has very real implications for the company, we should not read more into it than is actually written.
OT; Miss Scarlet,
Hello yourself. Nice to hear from you.
It looks like you may be on to something re your last post to dougs. Cometo think of it, you never see them both together in the same place...hmmmm.
OT: Doug, Is this a new rule?
For those of us who seem to have the most difficulty with compliance, would you be kind enough to clarify this post?
What 'kind' of posts should not be addressed to you in the future?
One wouldn't wish to step out of line inadvertently. TIA
regards,
frog
A new investigation.
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/040427/325/es4k2.html
Is anyone tracking the Kondragunta case?
There was an addition to the case file on April 7, but the file is not viewable. It seems that Florida has removed web access to the actual files.
The files are in the public domain but are not accessible via the web. If someone in the area is following the case, perhaps they would be kind enough to obtain the info and keep us updated.
regards,
frog
OT: worktoplay,
Good work, very good post.
Sorry to hear about your Mom. You gave her two years instead of the six months she was offered. Even though it wasn't as much as you would have liked every day extra must have seemed priceless.
Best regards,
Steve
worktoplay,
My streamer must be on the fritz also because I didn't see the move up either.
chiggah,
You are most welcome to indulge in any flight of fantasy that wish. It's a free country. Some of them may even be viable. Good luck.
The project is by no means risk free. If DNAP does not come through as we expect then they will do significant harm to their reputation. The Moffit Ctr is also accepting some risk as there is an 'oportunity cost' associated with any expenditure of resources. It estimates the potential return that might have been derived from the expended resources had they been available for another task. It is an indirect cost, but it is always a consideration.
This may well be a big deal, but not for the reasons stated. There is no validation here yet. There is only the opportunity to get a foot in the door.
As you and I have discussed before, the biggest hindrance to the exploitation of the platform up until now, has been the lack of quality data to perform their magic upon. At last they have access to viable and sortable data of a quality that they have not seen before. Now it is up to DNAP to take the ball and run with it. The results of the program will serve as the basis for eventual validation.
There is no money changing hands in this 'partnership'. DNAP will have to pay their own way through the endeavor. They are about to start another in a long line of classification exercises. Perhaps they will eventually finish one. If so this would be a great one to complete successfully.
This is definitely the 'big leagues'. They have been called up from the minors. Now let's see if they can hit.
regards,
frog
W2P, I thought you sold septic systems. Do you need to be a Biologist for that?
We also have salesman who try to 'educate' us, it's one of the experiences that makes life worth living. lol
best regards,
frog
w2p, Spin it how you like.
"assist in validating..." Might on the surface seem to be a little less formal but the key word is still 'validating'. To have any effect whatsoever in the validation process, evidence must be of a type that has been 'accepted' as 'valid'. Otherwise it is just window dressing.
As you suggest the new outlet would seem to indicate that there is a growing market (based on the 'major' assumption that it is a DNAP product being touted). That would seem to be a positive bit of news. However, if that means that the product is being marketed by those with a little less regard for the ethical niceties that we all espouse, then perhaps it is not as positive as it could be.
regards,
frog
ps. I'm an Engineer, my glass is neither half full nor half empty, as I choose my glass size based upon the amount of water I have available.
OT: Arch, No need to be sorry.
How is the rebuild coming? Did you ever figure out why the camshaft was out of position? Had the retainer broken?
Hope you will be back on the road soon.
regards,
frog
Wow, has this been substantiated?
---
"...assist in validating your eligibility for government entitlements such as Native American Rights..."
----
Has the government actually bought into this premise and agreed to accept DNAP results as proof of Native American ancestry?
Sure hope they are using the latest version (2.5), as the previous rev had results that were off by as much as 15%. A 15% Native American ancestry could put you on the tribal rolls.
Hard to believe that the Govt. has had time to check out Ancestry 2.5 already, it has only been out a couple of months.
Sure hope the the ad isn't unintentionally misleading?
regards,
frog
cosmic, I didn't compare them, you did.
I merely pointed out that if the industry as it stands today does not seem to be able to support HGS in it's present state, then it was no wonder that DNAP was experiencing such a bad time.
As usual, the response was rapid, misdirected and severe.
Have a good day!
cosmic,
--
"With about $1.3 billion in cash, Human Genome Sciences is not in imminent danger of running out of money."
If $1.3 billion in cash is your idea of a company that "can't keep their head above water"...then...
--
The beginning of this thread was the announcement that they were laying off 200 employees. Believe it or not, that is usually not a positive signal.
---
And I'm sure you've taken the time to talk with every single person on this planet to factually confirm that absolutely "no one is interested in DNAP"...!
---
The market is the ultimate arbiter of interest level. If you will take the time to peruse either the volumes or the general morbidity of the pps you will obtain a fairly accurate 'snapshot' into the general interest level associated with the company.
---
Thanks for your encouraging words and the unshakable confidence you continue to show in DNAP by sticking around.
---
You're welcome!
regards,
frog
If that is a veiled accusation it would seem to skate fairly close to the limits of what is acceptable behavior in this forum. Also, as an accusation, it would also be easier to address if it was expressed more clearly. tia
regards,
frog
First thing that came to my mind...even a 'real' genomic company with financing, reputation, alliances and drugs in the pipeline, can't seem to keep their head above water. No wonder no one is interested in DNAP.
Cosmic, I appreciate your reply for a couple of reasons. First, it was well mannered and almost entirely friendly. (the 'imprudent and questionable intelligence' remark being the only detraction). The second reason is a little more obscure. You see, the post that you replied to was initially struck from the board within a few seconds of it's posting. I posted a request for clarification from 'ihub Matt' and lo and behold after a couple of hours the post was restored.
I am very much encouraged by this response. It would seem that the local practices regarding message content are not necessarily always condoned by the more global authorities. I am grateful for the subtle but apparent reassesment of those practices. It is by no means the first override of such misdirected control, let us hope it is the last.
best regards,
frog
There has never been any factual evidence that there is a viable connection. There was a 'scenario' played out here a few months ago in which a web page was 'inadvertently' left in an unsecured state and was 'discovered accidently' by one of the players. Once it was 'discovered' by the board, it's mission was accomplished and it was immediatly discarded.
It was a fascinating interlude in the ongoing saga. The effort being expended to keep the 'flame' alive in the absence of any substantial progress has been remarkable.
There are a small number of pied pipers leading an ever diminishing parade of willing followers around and around in circles. They are unfortunately nearing the end of endurance of even the most faithful believers, and we are fast approaching some kind of denouement. Either the perpetual sequence of promises will play out unkept, or some significant event will occur to maintain the show. Most of us are hoping for the latter, I know I am.
regards,
frog
Public Citizen's Health Research Group is one of Ralph Nader's outfits. While formerly held in some regard, they have lost a significant amount of credibility lately. They seem more interested in getting their name in the headlines than they do about any serious concerns.
see the link;
http://thyroid.about.com/b/a/037297.htm
regards,
frog
But slopster you post on RB all the time using your imaqtru alias.
Doesn't sound very upbeat, does it?
"I am beginning to believe more and more that the genealogical world is not
ready for our product. Maybe in another 10 or 20 years..."
I guess we need to readjust our Fortune 500 expectations. lol
a 'few hundred' should be 'a few hundred thousand'. My bad.
Cosmic, It seems that we have been the recipient of divergent information in regards to the capabilities of the platform.
As you have stated there was some mention that studies could be accomplished given a couple of hundred thousand dollars and a six month time frame. The now moribund CMIH deal was along those lines.
However to suggest that such a study could result in a viable classifier, flies in the face of our own experiences. Statnome has been around for many multiples of six months and has had a lot more than a few hundred dollars available during that timeframe, and yet is still to see the light of day.
If such a program were available (and was also credible) it would be inconceivable that the pharmas would not take advantage of it. They spend more than that on a 30 second ad during a Seinfeld rerun.
Barring an update from the company, we can only assume that the offer is no longer available or it was not credible to begin with, being either more costly, of longer duration or simply ineffective.
regards,
frog
That's OK Bag, It's a suckers bet, I wouldn't take your money.
Patent attorneys are expected to 'pad' the claims of an application to mark out as broad an area of IP as possible. It is the job of the examiner to pare this down to the appropriate level. Invariably, if a patent is awarded, the awarded claims are a subset of the claims list of the original application.
In the rare instance that all of an applications claims are awarded, (after sufficiently chastising the attorney in question for being so timid) the law firm immediately resubmits the application with an ammended claims list marking out a broader swath of IP.
In either case the initial application does not survive the process intact.
regards,
frog
bag,
I can't make a bet without someone to bet with. So, are you up for it?
bag8ger, No, not yet.
At this time I lack one of the two essential components for such an endeavor. Are you willing to volunteer?
It would be 'safe' to bet against it being issued in it's present form.
ming, My apologies.
I assumed that since you posted the excerpt without any explanatory text, that it stood on it's own and was deemed to possess some level of profundity.
I stand corrected.
best regards,
frog
It would be significantly more remarkable if it wasn't!
"...compositions and methods are provided for inferring an individual's response to commonly used medications, which, remarkably, is a function of individual ancestry;"
Individual response's to medications (at least those that are genetically based) is what personalized medicine is all about. That the secrets to those responses resides in the individuals genetic code is also one of the foundations of the science. It is not a secret to anyone with a smidgeon of awareness that we inherit our genetic makeup from our forebearers. To find it 'remarkable' that the genetic differences that define us are the result of the genetic contributions of our ancestors seems a bit absurd.
It's a rule designed to limit obnoxious clutter.
How does the old saw go? The best laid plans of mice and men.......
ming, An excellent response. Thank you.
-----
Since the competitive advantage had a limited timespan (until the USPTO published the application) can we assume that that advantage has been exploited vigorously and the scientific team has developed new classifiers in the interim?
I am not sure if you meant to use the past tense here. I do not personally think that the competitive advantage ends with the publication of the application (or the patent itself). In that case what they have or have not been doing in the interim is not directly relevant to this point IMO.
-----
It was Frudakis who inferred that the competetive advantage was directly related to the amount of time that the information could be kept from publication.
"..To maintain its competitive advantage, the company will refrain from presenting details of the discovery until the findings are published by the US Patent and Trademark Office."
It is not a stretch of the imagination to suppose that the eventual presentation of the details of the discovery will eliminate the competetive advantage.
------
-If there have been no new products developed in the interim due to monetary or resource limitations, what advantage still exists now that the 'cat is out of the bag' so to speak?
The advantage conferred by the patent application and, in due course, by the patent itself.
------
While the advantage offered by the patent application has always existed (assuming the eventual granting of the patent), the advantage referred to by Frudakis is clearly related to the release of the details of the discovery. Since he felt strongly that keeping them confidential provided a significant advantage, it is fair to assume that the competition can extract meaningful and helpful information from the application itself. Information that they can use outside of the protection provided by the patent. Otherwise there would be no advantage to keeping it secret.
worktoplay, You have raised some interesting points and ask some pertinent questions. Here are a couple more that occur to me.
-Given the history of Shriver's arrival and the subsequent and very immediate patent application bearing both names, is it fair to assume that the new 'advantage' in developing pharmacological classifiers, wass a fairly sudden departure from the previously developed technology that bore the previously announced development projects Statinome and Ovanome?
-Since the competetive advantage had a limited timespan (until the USPTO published the application) can we assume that that advantage has been exploited vigorously and the scientific team has developed new classifiers in the interim?
-As the advantage post dates the Statinome and Ovanome classifiers and the competetive advantage was necessarily short lived, does this explain the appaerent 'back burner' status of these previously highly touted products? The limited resources of the compaqny would necessarily have to be devoted to developing products based on the short lived competetive advantage.
-Now that the application has been published and the 'headstart' has played out, can we expect to hear about all the new classifiers that have been developed during the protected timeframe?
-If there have been no new products developed in the interim due to monetary or resource limitations, what advantage still exists now that the 'cat is out of the bag' so to speak?
regards,
frog
In a heartbeat!