Agriculture: problems and pollution, new technologies and solutionsWhat is GMO?

Agriculture and soil. Pollution control, soil remediation, humus and new agricultural techniques.
Moindreffor
Grand Econologue
Grand Econologue
posts: 1465
Registration: 27/05/17, 22:20
Location: boundary between North and Aisne
x 285

Re: what is GMO?

Unread Messageby Moindreffor » 09/01/19, 17:59

Janic wrote:
The selection made by our ancestors is, strictly speaking, a genetic manipulation. Handle comes from hand. When in a given population, you take some ears to make a seed, you choose the genes it contains. At the expense of others. You manipulate genes ...
Too simple to understand?

On the contrary, it is elementary and even if I intervene little on the subject, I never said the opposite. I'm just pointing out that what you call genetic manipulation, others call it selection, which has nothing to do with a direct intrusion into the cell by ignoring natural barriers of protection against intrusion. We are not on the same scale of value!
It can be compared to vaccination (I know I break my feet with this subject, but it's the same process) Jenner, finds that cowpowers are immune to smallpox after having affected the udder of cows with variola vaccine. It is therefore an EXTERNAL contact without intrusion and therefore passing through the immune system of the skin. Jenner will go through, annihilate this barrier to go directly under the skin assuming that where the immune system of the skin reduces the infection of the vaccine, it would increase the chances of making the next immune system even more effective, that of the blood. and it would have worked except that in the following epidemics the vaccinated were the first and most important victims and this had not been planned or imagined by the health authorities or point that the English State removed the vaccination obligation of this disease.
GMOs is the same story except that the 2 ° barrier protection is also crossed without precautions (which, by the way?)
Too simple to understand?
Why confuse with a reversibility or not ???

Because any intervention DANCE the living depends on it! if you do a bypass, it's as irreversible as if you have a heart transplant!
Just because it annoys you? Need irrepressible to be right?

Or simple common sense!
Reread. I did not say it's irreversible.

It's true, it's me who says it, but not about the selection, but the intrusion. We have 2 centuries of experiments of all kinds on the living and with each new discovery, we realize that we did not know that this or that mechanism, had close links with other complex mechanisms, sophisticated that it takes sometimes try to repair, when it's possible only.
But our do-it-yourselfers do not take this into account since no ethics committee frames these bulb heads that manufacturers do not use for their beautiful eyes, but to produce wholesale industrial products, huge profits, especially since the living can be patented and their turnover has exploded. 7 billion, soon 10 billion customer to the key, it's not nothing and as much as possible, do not lose them stupidly with bio, alternative medicines.
Nothing like. I'm not stupid enough (even in your eyes - I hope)

Especially in my eyes, I appreciate your efforts to direct the spirits and the acts towards a better respect of the ground, of the life of this one, so it is not a question of bullshit, but of different point of view
to challenge a truism: if we stop cultivating ("heal" if you want), most varieties (same old) will disappear ...

They will not disappear, any more than trees, flowers, wildlife " where the human hand has not set foot » : Cheesy: . According to Darwinism natural selection will sort and the most robust (according to criteria other than ours) will resist as they have done for millennia.
b) how does this contradict the fact that creating these varieties has been a "genetic manipulation" by our ancestors (in the literal sense: with their hands, they chose such genes rather than others)?

They did not know anything about genes, not difficult! But by selecting, with their hands, certain seeds, they did it at the expense of others more robust, more adapted to the soil, the climate, etc ... and this concerns especially our time.
We can compare the current corn in our regions, greedy water, with that of the regions of this product where the fields are not just watered, but producing smaller ears, and there is no need for chemical treatments. You must have already mentioned the question, I believe!
Let's go further: on the contrary, the fact that this is reversible even confirms the nature of manipulation: manipulated in the sense of human needs (therefore genetically different), these plants can no longer live alone. I remind you, this is quite true for "old vegetables", so idolized today!

Again, I'm not talking about selection here, but INTRUSION IN FORCE in the genome, without knowing the consequences in the medium or long term. As for plants selected for the needs of man (sic) it is rather selected for industrial needs, they rather conform the needs of their customers to them. it's called marketing!
Biology is the same for all that lives and the lessons we can draw from it are the same; and when the human being claims to have more knowledge and experience than that of all the billions of living beings that have passed from him, for millennia (others say millions but no matter) I find it vain and dangerous to put the spell of life in the hands of these genius handymen, but the story is behind us to remind us that the misused genius has always generated disasters (maybe even global warming)

why always oppose what nature does (what is good) to what man does (it's bad) when they both do the same thing
you said elsewhere that a lumberjack cutting a tree in the descending Moon will have a wood that will not need treatment to keep it, so if the wind fell a tree in the descending Moon this tree will not break down?
0 x
"Those with the biggest ears are not the ones who hear best"
(of me)

Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6445
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: Burgundy
x 86

Re: what is GMO?

Unread Messageby Janic » 09/01/19, 18:32

why always oppose what nature does (what is good) to what man does (it's bad) when they both do the same thing
do you really believe that? "Nature" does neither good nor bad, it obeys universal laws, not human moral laws
you said elsewhere that a lumberjack cutting a tree in the descending Moon will have a wood that will not need treatment to keep it, so if the wind fell a tree in the descending Moon this tree will not break down?
It's up to the lumberjacks and carpenters to answer you, you must probably have them around you. Their words are binding only on them and where their wood is parasitic and they have lied (but since they have been so from generation to generation, they have realized that this practice was not valid. has not been straying since then, and that gives them reason.
0 x
"We do science with facts, as is a house with stones, but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a heap of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré
"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" Exnihiloest
User avatar
Exnihiloest
Grand Econologue
Grand Econologue
posts: 1190
Registration: 21/04/15, 17:57
x 57

Re: what is GMO?

Unread Messageby Exnihiloest » 09/01/19, 21:11

Perseus wrote:.
In my opinion, the genetic information should be subjected to a functioning close to what exists for the free licenses (to make simple: remain open, free access, free modification, free use, free reproduction ...). Of course, the modification of this information must pass through the filter of a rigorous and independent experimentation. This totally breaks the potential profitability of a GMO for a company.

I am afraid that this will be condemned GMOs, given the level of investment needed that will never be profitable. The patent system seems to me more relevant. The information is available, the product is created in accordance with the patent and anyone can use it, and only the commercial exploitation is subject to the payment of royalties, but all this for a given time, then it is free.
0 x
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6445
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: Burgundy
x 86

Re: what is GMO?

Unread Messageby Janic » 10/01/19, 08:50

I am afraid that this will be condemned GMOs, given the level of investment needed that will never be profitable. The patent system seems to me more relevant. The information is available, the product is created in accordance with the patent and anyone can use it, and only the commercial exploitation is subject to the payment of royalties, but all this for a given time, then it is free.
another one who believes in Santa Claus! It's been a long time since labs discover anything new. Prof. Even denounces this situation where it is enough to change a little stuff on an existing product to be able to apply for a patent, which will be exploited as a miracle drug, more effective than the previous more efficient, itself, than the previous, etc. .
But a patent does not guarantee the validity, let alone the effectiveness of a product, whateverbut of its originality only (Christophe knows something!) As for obtaining the AMM it is necessary and sufficient that the new product is at least equivalent to its predecessor, but its price will explode the time of the patent is 20 years of guaranteed profits. We really do not care about the jaws of Panurge's sheep, paralyzed by the fear and desire, superstitious, that it works for them.
0 x
"We do science with facts, as is a house with stones, but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a heap of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré
"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" Exnihiloest
Moindreffor
Grand Econologue
Grand Econologue
posts: 1465
Registration: 27/05/17, 22:20
Location: boundary between North and Aisne
x 285

Re: what is GMO?

Unread Messageby Moindreffor » 10/01/19, 14:07

Janic wrote:
why always oppose what nature does (what is good) to what man does (it's bad) when they both do the same thing
do you really believe that? "Nature" does neither good nor bad, it obeys universal laws, not human moral laws
you said elsewhere that a lumberjack cutting a tree in the descending Moon will have a wood that will not need treatment to keep it, so if the wind fell a tree in the descending Moon this tree will not break down?
It's up to the lumberjacks and carpenters to answer you, you must probably have them around you. Their words are binding only on them and where their wood is parasitic and they have lied (but since they have been so from generation to generation, they have realized that this practice was not valid. has not been straying since then, and that gives them reason.

the woodcutter's blow comes from you, so the question was on:
Do you think that if the wind blows down a tree in the descending Moon, it will not rot as the woodcutters you have mentioned have so well remarked and that for generations, can you simply answer this question? and precisely
0 x
"Those with the biggest ears are not the ones who hear best"
(of me)

Moindreffor
Grand Econologue
Grand Econologue
posts: 1465
Registration: 27/05/17, 22:20
Location: boundary between North and Aisne
x 285

Re: what is GMO?

Unread Messageby Moindreffor » 10/01/19, 14:10

Janic wrote:
why always oppose what nature does (what is good) to what man does (it's bad) when they both do the same thing
do you really believe that? "Nature" does neither good nor bad, it obeys universal laws, not human moral laws

so why do you say that what is natural (here produces nature) is good and what is synthesized by man is wrong (even if man copies nature identically)
0 x
"Those with the biggest ears are not the ones who hear best"
(of me)
Moindreffor
Grand Econologue
Grand Econologue
posts: 1465
Registration: 27/05/17, 22:20
Location: boundary between North and Aisne
x 285

Re: what is GMO?

Unread Messageby Moindreffor » 10/01/19, 14:14

Janic wrote:
I am afraid that this will be condemned GMOs, given the level of investment needed that will never be profitable. The patent system seems to me more relevant. The information is available, the product is created in accordance with the patent and anyone can use it, and only the commercial exploitation is subject to the payment of royalties, but all this for a given time, then it is free.
another one who believes in Santa Claus! It's been a long time since labs discover anything new. Prof. Even denounces this situation where it is enough to change a little stuff on an existing product to be able to apply for a patent, which will be exploited as a miracle drug, more effective than the previous more efficient, itself, than the previous, etc. .
But a patent does not guarantee the validity, let alone the effectiveness of a product, whateverbut of its originality only (Christophe knows something!) As for obtaining the AMM it is necessary and sufficient that the new product is at least equivalent to its predecessor, but its price will explode the time of the patent is 20 years of guaranteed profits. We really do not care about the jaws of Panurge's sheep, paralyzed by the fear and desire, superstitious, that it works for them.

it was more or less true before, when the security was good, more with the arrival of generics
0 x
"Those with the biggest ears are not the ones who hear best"
(of me)
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6445
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: Burgundy
x 86

Re: what is GMO?

Unread Messageby Janic » 10/01/19, 17:39

it was more or less true before, when the security was good, more with the arrival of generics
profound mistake, generics are only available on the market after the end of 20 years and that for any new drug put on the market and they make gold balls with those who are supposed to work miracles on cancers to price defying all reason.
But India, which is mostly generic, is trying to circumvent these patents (it's easy for all patents) by filing their own patents based on their models. Big drug companies are not happy because they do not charge the same outrageous price for their model. In case of a copy trial, they know (because they do it themselves) that it is enough to drag things to the deadline of the patent to extinguish any prosecution, that's why these labs try to negotiate arrangements that are hardly accepted by India.
https://www.usinenouvelle.com/article/e ... ts.N190962
"Not enough inventive". The Indian Supreme Court rejected, on Monday 1er April 2013, the appeal of the Swiss pharmaceutical company Novartis concerning the patent on its anticancer drug Glivec. Already, on Wednesday 12 December 2012, the Indian Patent Office had canceled the protection of an asthma drug designed by Merck. Blessed bread for the Indian manufacturer of generic Cipla. It can flood the market with cheap copies of the American drug. Three months earlier, another Swiss, Roche, was paying the price for Indian intransigence. Since entering the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 2005, India has nevertheless ratified patent protection rules. Including for drugs. But its interpretation differs from that of Western countries. Like other emerging countries, it refuses to pay the high price so that its population has access to treatment. Even if it means challenging the international rules of industrial property. A delicate arm wrestling for Western laboratories that want to protect their expensive molecules, but also penetrate these markets of the future. According to research firm IMS Health, with more than 150 billion (nearly 113 billion), Brazil, Russia, China, and South Africa are expected to account for two-thirds of global growth of the pharmaceutical market by 2016.

the puzzles
India only patents in case of therapeutic improvement.
Brazil and Thailand are followers of compulsory licenses.
China interprets the rules of intellectual property.


It is in India that crystallizes this new patent war. World leader in the production and export of generic drugs with giants like Ranbaxy, Dr Reddy's and Cipla, "the country is renowned for being the third-world pharmacy," says Olivier Moussa, associate attorney at Roche avocats. NGOs fear that the application of WTO rules will restrict its role as a provider of cheap medicines. The 29 November 2012, a hundred associations from around the world has called on the Indian Supreme Court to rule against a lawsuit from the Swiss laboratory Novartis. The latter wants to have a new patent recognized for its anticancer drug Glivec. For Indian justice, it is only a different formulation of the product and not an innovation. But she decided to grant a patent only in case of better therapeutic efficacy. On Monday 1er April 2013, the Indian Supreme Court finally decided to reject Novartis' patent application.

Three possible responses

To replicate, Western laboratories are experimenting with three types of strategy. Under pressure from public opinion, some prefer to abandon the game. After three years of battle, industrial 39 had withdrawn in 2001 their complaint against a law of South Africa intended to favor access to cheap treatments. "'The Pretoria case' was a huge communication mistake from the pharmaceutical industry," says Bernard Geneste, Associate Counsel at CMS Bureau Francis Lefebvre, "Since then, laboratories such as GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) have been regularly announced. free provision of treatment in southern countries, with the idea that immediate profitability may not be the only criterion for valuing the company. " These manufacturers take into account the negative impact that a long-term lawsuit can provoke. And, on the other hand, the impact of a positive communication campaign ...

Other laboratories prefer to continue the legal battle, to enforce their intellectual property at all costs. On April 1er, Novartis condemned the decision of the Indian Supreme Court, accusing it of "discouraging innovative drug discovery" in this emerging country. Will the group go so far as to bring the case to the WTO, thanks to the political support of Switzerland? "On the part of India, this is protectionism, recognizes Elizabeth Hervier, who advises the pharmaceutical industry and founded his firm in India.But we can not treat the Asian countries, where the social security As the European countries do, the laboratory would be better off negotiating on price: it would keep more volumes and its product would always have a higher price in Europe. " The US giant Pfizer has appealed following the refusal of India to grant him a patent for a cure anticancer. As for the German Bayer, his situation is delicate. The patent of its anticancer Nexavar runs until 2020. India, judging its price "exorbitant", requires it to provide a "compulsory license" to the generic Natco Pharma. An initiative tolerated by a WTO agreement for public health goals. The copy of the drug from the European should be sold 175 dollars the monthly dose, a decrease of 97% of the original price. Bayer receives in return a royalty of 6% of sales. No way, he replied. His complaint was rejected in September by the Indian Intellectual Property Appeal Board.

We were the first company to join The medicines patent pool, the pharmaceutical patent community funded by Unitaid.

Michel Joly, President of Gilead France

The path of compromise

Faced with the threat of compulsory licenses held by several emerging countries (Brazil, South Africa or Thailand) some manufacturers prefer to innovate ... in the compromise. In India, Roche launched a pilot project a year ago. It reduces the price of two oncology therapies, sold under a different name and packaging, to prevent reimportation. An initiative already tested by Gilead, the leading Californian biotech in the treatment of AIDS. While running to 2017, she licensed her patents to manufacturers (14 India and 1 South Africa) to produce quality high-volume and low-cost treatments. These copies, which are not generic, now account for two-thirds of the treatments sold by Gilead worldwide. "Then, in July 2011, we were the first company to join The Medicines patent pool, welcomes Michel Joly, president of Gilead France.We have granted this pharmaceutical patent community funded by Unitaid conditions similar to those made in our Indian partners. " Thanks to these agreements, her triple therapy Stribild, authorized since August 2012 in the United States, saw its generic version commercialized at the same time in 100 emerging countries. Previously, it usually took ten to fifteen years for such a drug to be released ...

Gaëlle Fleitour

Publish ... to protect yourself
This is an unexpected way to prevent competitors from establishing monopolies by filing patents. In 1999, ten laboratories publish data on the human genome in the public domain. Eleven years later, Britain's GSK is giving researchers access to the design of 13 500 chemical molecules able to inhibit the malaria agent. "In the field of life, which relates to biotech, industrial recovery and specific development must be patented, explains Geneviève Fioraso, the Minister of Research. But researchers must have access to research advances. About 60 of them are working to deploy an interoperable metabase of data on all living things, including those protected by a license.
0 x
"We do science with facts, as is a house with stones, but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a heap of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré
"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" Exnihiloest
pedrodelavega
Éconologue good!
Éconologue good!
posts: 451
Registration: 09/03/13, 21:02
x 7

Re: what is GMO?

Unread Messageby pedrodelavega » 10/01/19, 19:09

Janic wrote:
it was more or less true before, when the security was good, more with the arrival of generics
profound mistake, generics are only available on the market after the end of 20 years and that for any new drug put on the market and they make gold balls with those who are supposed to work miracles on cancers to price defying all reason.
But India, which is mostly generic, is trying to circumvent these patents (it's easy for all patents) by filing their own patents based on their models. Big drug companies are not happy because they do not charge the same outrageous price for their model.


india-the-lab-world-of-drugs-nonconforming
https://www.lemonde.fr/economie/article ... _3234.html
0 x
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6445
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: Burgundy
x 86

Re: what is GMO?

Unread Messageby Janic » 10/01/19, 19:46

india-the-lab-world-of-drugs-nonconforming
https://www.lemonde.fr/economie/article ... _3234.html

India is no more free of drug problems, including many imitations, than other countries. But the biggest scandals involve compliant drugs from major pharmaceutical companies such as vioxx and distilbene, plus the exorbitant price.
The patent of its anticancer Nexavar runs until 2020. India, judging its price "exorbitant", requires it to provide a "compulsory license" to the generic Natco Pharma. An initiative tolerated by a WTO agreement for public health goals. The copy of the drug of the European should be sold 175 dollars the monthly dose, a decrease of 97% of the original price[*]. Bayer receives in return a royalty of 6% of sales. No way, he replied. His complaint was rejected in September by the Indian Intellectual Property Appeal Board.
[*] 5833 dollars of origin

NEXAVAR 200 mg, film-coated tablet, 4 28 blister pack
Therapeutic Classes: Oncology and Hematology
Antineoplastics> Sorafenib
Price including VAT: 2,998,15 €
SS refund rate: 100%

Dosage
The recommended dose of Nexavar in adults is 400 mg sorafenib (2 200 tablets mg) twice daily (ie a total daily dose of 800 mg).
Treatment should be continued as long as a clinical benefit is observed or until the occurrence of unacceptable toxicity.

so 112: 8 = 14 days is per month 6531.7 euros, only for the drug instead of 196 euros!
0 x
"We do science with facts, as is a house with stones, but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a heap of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré
"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" Exnihiloest




  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Back to "Agriculture: problems and pollution, new techniques and solutions"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 1 guest