Replies to post #20143 on Cytogenix (fka CYGX)

[Paulness]

holycow the claim is 50% higher effect the new synthetic DNA has than the old DNA ,the key is how much effect the old DNA had. If it was say a 40% effect the new DNA would be 60% effective. This is in reply to your following post.

.{ Until this publication, the company has been very careful about the claims it makes about the effectiveness of this synthetic DNA plasmid product. They have always stated that they believe it to be AS effective as the older type but have raised the possibility that it might be MORE effective. While that care continues, this document reveals for the first time what might be the possible effectiveness benefit. "Our experiments have shown that the biological response to c-DNAs with no vector backbone is approximately one and one half times higher than traditional plasmids" (p. 4). (Holycow comment: Oh my God. Am I right? This means two and a half times more effective!)(I need help here. Is this a claim of 50 percent higher or a hundred and fifty percent higher -which is two and a half time higher?)

[holycow]

I found that earlier post where I quote from the 10K about microbe delivery:

This is "a separate technology against bacteria using mimetic oligonucleotides as sequences to silence targeted bacterial genes" (p. 2 bottom).

From my post 20142 from 6/25/05

I don't mean to give the impression that I think myself competent on such matters. I am trying to understand but realize that my level of understanding pales compared to many others here. Paulness, maybe I could borrow some of those smart pills you've been taking.

Maybe I will add one important thing I forgot from my last post. Vaccines, man. How does the delivery issue fit with the whole area of vaccines. And another thought while I am writing. I have a suspicion from reading the 10K that the FDA is being very very cautious about permitting any human trials with all these new DNA techniques after the cases in recent years with the bubble boys? in France, and Pennnsylvania. We probably say, no, you don't understand, ours doesn't screw with the genome. We intervene at a different point and ours is safer, by much. And they probably say, oh yea, well prove it and prove it good before we give the OK.