News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Supreme Court: Natural Isolated DNA Not Patentable, Synthetic DNA Is [pdf]. Parent comment

Re:Supreme Court: Natural Isolated DNA Not Patentable, Synth... by RabbitAngstrom on Thursday June 13, 2013 @12:24PM (#5874898)
Once you are born with synthetic DNA, is it not "existing in nature?" An interesting point, but cloning is not very popular among bioethicists.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Supreme Court: Natural Isolated DNA Not Patentable, Synth... by anonymfus on Thursday June 13, 2013 @01:17PM (#5875239)
Why cloning? In vitro fertilisation is common.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Supreme Court: Natural Isolated DNA Not Patentable, Synth... by RabbitAngstrom on Thursday June 13, 2013 @01:38PM (#5875359)
IVF doesn't actually change the genetic makeup of the sperm or egg in question. To do so would create a genetically altered human.
[ Parent | on HN ]