Glad to see we both agree that mRNA vaccines don't tinker with DNA.
We disagree on the definition of gene therapy and its practical uses.
Many in the field (see prior papers I linked, ASGCT statement on mRNA Covid vaccines, Bayer pharma exec, European regulators) call mRNA based therapies gene therapies, and I agree with them.
Their and my working definition of gene therapy is insertion of genetic material (mRNA or DNA) into cells to prevent or treat disease.
There is nothing confusing about that definition.
By that definition, mRNA Covid vaccines and DNA based covid vaccines that encode the SARS2 spike protein antigen are gene therapies.
Your definition of gene therapy is confusing, as it apparently says only DNA insertions are gene therapy, but the equivalent readout of mRNA molecules when inserted are not. So then the DNA based Covid vaccines are gene therapy, but the mRNA ones are not?
Talk about confusing.
You never answered *any* of my questions, but asked me to answer yours, and I will. You asked the definition of gene.
It is "the basic unit of inheritance," meaning DNA molecules that exist inside the cells of an organism that are passed down to their offspring, which determine their traits and so on.
The DNA molecules from gene therapy (for instance from Biomarin's hemophilia A drug) do not pass down to one's offspring, and are not genes. But they are genetic material, just like mRNA (see wikipedia article I linked). So I don't see how the definition of a gene is relevant to the definition of "gene therapy."
The definition you link is wrong, in that gene therapy does not *modify* a person's genes in any way! Are you saying the hemophilia gene therapies from Biomarin and Sangamo/Pfizer, which use AAV to insert a working copy of the factor 8 protein for proper blood clotting somehow "modifies a person's genes?"
The obvious answer is *NO,* they do not. These gene therapies do not change the DNA code that will be passed down to their offspring (the definition of "gene"). Their kids will still unfortunately have a good chance to inherit the hemophilia A gene too. And for AAV based liver gene therapies, when the liver grows and when cells produce copies of themselves, the inserted DNA code is washed out over time, since it did not integrate into the chromosome (which is the only thing that is faithfully copied to one's offspring).
AAV gene therapy merely introduces into liver cells a piece of genetic code (DNA) episomally / outside the chromosome, telling the liver to produce the proper clotting factor 8.
Introducing a *new* gene (genetic material, piece of DNA code) that is non-integrating does not *modify* one's genes (DNA that is passed on to one's offspring).
That's why your definition is confusing.
Mine is not.
Therapies which modify the DNA code (change the DNA of the chromosomes, which will be passed on to daughter cells) are called gene editing therapies.
Therapies which regulate how pieces of DNA code are expressed are called gene regulation therapies.
No confusion.
Hopefully we will have equal chance to talk about the prospects of brilacidin and kevetrin going forward here for IPIX.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
