There is a big difference between PCR and CRISPR though. Whilst PCR is effectively a reading technology, CRISPR is a writing technology. For many medical technologies then PCR is a standalone diagnostic tool (it is HUGE in mol. biol., pathology, biotech). However you can quite easily see CRISPR being a core tech within revolutionary deliverable medical treatments.
As Eisen points out its kind of odd that the group who rush to do the obvious human implementation should then get a share of all this potential... Not really a novel invention by that point in my opinion.
Yes, exclusively licensing CRISPR on an indication-by-indication basis as a therapeutic itself (as someone below has suggested has already happened by Broad) would be worrisome.
Comments
There is a big difference between PCR and CRISPR though. Whilst PCR is effectively a reading technology, CRISPR is a writing technology. For many medical technologies then PCR is a standalone diagnostic tool (it is HUGE in mol. biol., pathology, biotech). However you can quite easily see CRISPR being a core tech within revolutionary deliverable medical treatments.
As Eisen points out its kind of odd that the group who rush to do the obvious human implementation should then get a share of all this potential... Not really a novel invention by that point in my opinion.
Yes, exclusively licensing CRISPR on an indication-by-indication basis as a therapeutic itself (as someone below has suggested has already happened by Broad) would be worrisome.