About sex, heredity and biopiracy
Alexander Sergeev, Radio LibertyInheritance is not limited to the transmission of the genetic code.
According to New Scientist magazine, "experiments on mice have shown for the first time that a secret epigenetic code superimposed on DNA molecules and changing the work of genes can be transmitted for three generations." The fact that methyl groups attached to DNA regulate the activity of genes has been known for a long time. The study of this phenomenon is engaged in the science of epigenetics. But until now there was no reliable data on the hereditary transmission of epigenetic DNA marking. Meanwhile, in this way, some signs acquired during life or even conditions preceding conception can be transmitted to the offspring. Epigenetic markup changes during life under the influence of environmental factors, diet, stress, diseases. And fundamentally, all this can have an impact on the offspring.
In November, a new scientific journal Biology of Sex Difference – "Biology of Sex Differences" was launched. In the first article, the editor-in-chief of the journal, neuroscientist Arthur Arnold from the University of California at Los Angeles explains the reasons for the appearance of the new edition. "The analysis of scientific literature shows that the male sex is much more studied than the female, both in animals and in humans. In basic scientific research and medical work, men's biology is more reflected than women's. New drugs are being worked out mainly on men, despite the fact that there are sex differences in the metabolism and action of drugs. Moreover, the sex of the test subjects is often not even indicated in scientific reports." Among the first articles published in the journal is a review of last year's H1N1 swine flu epidemic by gender of the sick. All articles of the journal are published in open access on the Internet within the framework of the Open Access model.
A two–week summit within the framework of the International Convention on Biodiversity has ended in the Japanese city of Nagoya, Science weekly reports. Before the start of the summit, there were rather skeptical predictions about its results. It was pointed out, in particular, that by 2010 none of the biodiversity conservation goals set 10 years ago had been achieved. But unexpectedly, the current summit was declared extremely successful. It's all about the measures agreed upon on it to combat biopiracy. This is not an illegal animal trade at all, as one might think. The word "biopiracy" has recently been called the commercial use of knowledge obtained through wildlife research, without deductions to countries where this nature has been studied. For example, the analysis of the venom of the Brazilian frog made it possible to synthesize a cure for hypertension. And Brazil got nothing for it. So it was in the past. Now it will be considered biopiracy. In order to stop it, countries have the right to demand from scientists a detailed report on the goals and results of research, monitor their use and, if the work leads to commercial success, then apply for deductions. Actually, the summit was dedicated to the difficult negotiations regarding this money. "Not everyone got what they wanted, but most snatched something," writes Science. And actually, a new ambitious plan has been adopted for the conservation of biodiversity until 2020. It provides for a twofold reduction in the rate of destruction of wild animals, the prevention of the extinction of endangered species and the restoration of 15% of degraded ecosystems. This plan is much more extensive than the unfulfilled plan for 2010.
The topic of gene patenting, which is close to the issue of biopiracy, has recently been developed in the United States. According to the New Scientist magazine, the US Department of Justice has published explanations according to which it is impossible to patent genetic sequences that occur in humans or in nature. Earlier, the court of first instance decided to annul the genetic sequences patented by Myriad Genetics that increase the risk of developing breast cancer. Such a patent could prevent other companies from conducting cancer research. However, according to Jim Greenwood, president of the American Biotechnology Industry Organization, a ban on patenting natural genes could undermine American leadership in the field of biotechnology investments.
Portal "Eternal youth" http://vechnayamolodost.ru11.11.2010