Posted On: 01/06/2015 7:05:20 PM
Post# of 30066
From the horse's mouth...
"Dear XXX Family,
Thank you for the e-mail. Amarantus was the company that first described and patented MANF. They used a cell line to purify the protein and then they made the gene and protein artificially. So there were real good grounds for the patent. I do not think that patents in any way inhibit science.
I think the major problem is , whether some large pharma company is interested to develop MANF for diabetes. It is also crucial to know, whether MANF works in humans.
It is now too early to say, whwther MANF can cure diabetes in human patients. We need more work in animals and also in human patients. Until now all looks very promising. Needless to say that research in the laboratories also need financial support and that is not always in place.
Kind regards,
Mart Saarma
On 7.7.2014 20:49, XXX@aol.com wrote:
Dr. Saarma,
Hope all is well. Quick question for you. How can the American company AMARANTUS get a patent for MANF? Isn't MANF produced naturally by the human body? All this does is hold back science. I need a cure for my daughter's diabetes. Don't organizations such as the FDA and others care about people? It seems as if all anyone cares about is MONEY. Sometimes I really dislike people. We should be trying to help one another not hurt progress that helps humans.
P.S. Do you really think MANF can cure Diabetes?
Sincerely,
The XXX Family"
P.S. When I found out Dr. Saarma was doing diabetic work from Watson on Yahoo, I emailed him numerous times since my daughter has Type 1. Above was one of his responses. I quote, "Amarantus was the company that first described and patented MANF..." Those were his words not mine. That is why he started using MANF2. MANF3 is GDNF.
Manolo
"Dear XXX Family,
Thank you for the e-mail. Amarantus was the company that first described and patented MANF. They used a cell line to purify the protein and then they made the gene and protein artificially. So there were real good grounds for the patent. I do not think that patents in any way inhibit science.
I think the major problem is , whether some large pharma company is interested to develop MANF for diabetes. It is also crucial to know, whether MANF works in humans.
It is now too early to say, whwther MANF can cure diabetes in human patients. We need more work in animals and also in human patients. Until now all looks very promising. Needless to say that research in the laboratories also need financial support and that is not always in place.
Kind regards,
Mart Saarma
On 7.7.2014 20:49, XXX@aol.com wrote:
Dr. Saarma,
Hope all is well. Quick question for you. How can the American company AMARANTUS get a patent for MANF? Isn't MANF produced naturally by the human body? All this does is hold back science. I need a cure for my daughter's diabetes. Don't organizations such as the FDA and others care about people? It seems as if all anyone cares about is MONEY. Sometimes I really dislike people. We should be trying to help one another not hurt progress that helps humans.
P.S. Do you really think MANF can cure Diabetes?
Sincerely,
The XXX Family"
P.S. When I found out Dr. Saarma was doing diabetic work from Watson on Yahoo, I emailed him numerous times since my daughter has Type 1. Above was one of his responses. I quote, "Amarantus was the company that first described and patented MANF..." Those were his words not mine. That is why he started using MANF2. MANF3 is GDNF.
Manolo
(0)
(0)
