This is an artifact of patent laws in the US not some nefarious conspiracy. Back in the 70s and 80s, gene sequencing meant an incredibly laborious process that would take months to years. Remember the Human Genome Project? It took literally years to complete, and even when they announced it was "complete," they hadn't actually finished the sequence and it took several more years.
Now, that also means it was incredibly costly to develop a gene sequence. So the argument was made that it represented intellectual property, the culmination of many many hours of expertise and huge amounts of money. Thus, if you had a lab that finally sequenced a species for the first time, you could file for a patent on it. Naturally, gene tech companies did the same, resulting in a voracious demand for new patents whenever a new species or strain of this or that was discovered. It meant that if you used that gene sequence data to develop a new product, like an antibiotic, you owned the rights to it.
Regardless of what you think of this concept, or whether it should be legal, it is legal right now, and it is NOT evidence that the sequences are lab made. It is evidence that a lab did the work to come up with a long ass list of As, Tc, C, and Gs of a particular specimen.
Do not spread misinformation. It makes us look like idiots.
Yep. All after they shittified supermarket produce in the 60s and 70s and fluoride flooding too.
I just looked the first one up.
Doesn't appear to be what the pic says.
https://patents.google.com/patent/US5676977A/en
No but it’s a pretty interesting one.
This BS again?
This is an artifact of patent laws in the US not some nefarious conspiracy. Back in the 70s and 80s, gene sequencing meant an incredibly laborious process that would take months to years. Remember the Human Genome Project? It took literally years to complete, and even when they announced it was "complete," they hadn't actually finished the sequence and it took several more years.
Now, that also means it was incredibly costly to develop a gene sequence. So the argument was made that it represented intellectual property, the culmination of many many hours of expertise and huge amounts of money. Thus, if you had a lab that finally sequenced a species for the first time, you could file for a patent on it. Naturally, gene tech companies did the same, resulting in a voracious demand for new patents whenever a new species or strain of this or that was discovered. It meant that if you used that gene sequence data to develop a new product, like an antibiotic, you owned the rights to it.
Regardless of what you think of this concept, or whether it should be legal, it is legal right now, and it is NOT evidence that the sequences are lab made. It is evidence that a lab did the work to come up with a long ass list of As, Tc, C, and Gs of a particular specimen.
Do not spread misinformation. It makes us look like idiots.
How was this not known before Trump appointed him Grand Poobah of Plandemics