They linked two quantized energy-dependent changes in in base pairs from single nucleotide polymorphisms to differences in fixed amino acid substitutions. The substitutions link the nutrient-dependent pheromone-controlled stability of a protein from the organized genome of S. cerevisiae to the differentiation of all cell types in all living genera via alternative splicings of pre-mRNA (microRNAs).
The senior author insults the intelligence of all serious scientists with this claim:
“Nature is probably the best engineer there is. It’s had millions of years of evolution to develop and optimize biological systems,” Sato says.
Welcome to the world of “Info Wars” that George Church et al., placed into the context of a “billion dollar baby” in therapy via what was concealed in this patent: RNA-Guided Human Genome Engineering
RNA interference is quantized energy-dependent and naturally occurs in the context of selection for energy-dependent codon optimality, which links the repair of virus-damaged DNA to all extant biodiversity via the physiology of reproduction. Church et al., thought they could patent the naturally occurring process through which quantized energy-dependent microRNA biogenesis links energy as information to all biophysically constrained biodiversity.
See for comparison: MiR-221 negatively regulates innate anti-viral response
…our study identified a novel negative microRNA regulator of innate antiviral response, which is dependent on ELF4.
This makes it more difficult to link anything except quantized energy-dependent microRNA biogenesis from naturally occurring RNA interference from DNA repair to viral latency and biodiversity.
What would happen if someone tried to patent the microRNA-mediated regulation of the innate anti-viral response?
Would the NIH insist on being listed as co-owner of the patent, again?
Only after securing the patent were Church et al., and the NIH forced to tell others what serious scientists have known about the delayed scientific progess that could otherwise have limited some of the unnecessary suffering and the premature deaths linked from the virus-driven degradation of messenger RNA to all pathology.
…if multiple holders of intellectual property (IP) rights, particularly patents, covering a biomedical technology can individually block others from conducting research on that technology, then overall research progress could be stifled. Though many observers now agree 20 years later that empirical evidence of a patent-based anticommons in biomedical research is inconclusive (2), if not wholly refuted (3, 4), there are emerging areas beyond patent law in which the proliferation of exclusionary rights may threaten research in much the way that Heller and Eisenberg predicted.
Follow the money to see who might be willing to continue to contribute to the unnecessary suffering and premature death of us all via the virus-driven degradation of our messenger RNA.
See the report on HAP2(GCS1)-dependent gamete fusion requires a positively charged carboxy-terminal domain (2010)
Do you think that Alex Jones could help to clarify why a mass media science outlet would call attention to an 8 year-old article at a time when students ages 10+ can learn what is known to serious scientists about cell biology by playing Cytosis.
Moving forward. All comorbidities have been linked to the virus-driven theft of quantized energy via failed RNA-mediated DNA repair.
Where will you be when the serious scientists come to remove you from your position in academia and/or charge you with crimes against humanity?