I don't recall whether they were actually producing the protein or
just testing
whether or not the attempt to copy a specific DNA strand (gene)
succeeded; i.e.,
if the person has the gene.
That kind of test is
much easier done with slicing and electrophoresis or a GeneChip(R) rather than
the elaborate process of isolation and reverse polymerase. Its always cheaper to
just tear something apart than to isolate and reassemble/recreate it.
I can imagine the latter process, in which case the protein
isn't required.
If the DNA segment is a non-protein encoding
segment then there is little point to isolating it for production purposes.
There are some non-coding segments of DNA which are used mechanically during the
transcription of neighbouring genes, or as binding sites for DNA methalation to
deactivate a gene, but they have little intrinsic value in and of themselves.
Remove them from the main DNA strand and you will merely affect the
transcription of those neighbouring genes, but adding it in addition to the
original copy, somewhere else, and it will not halt or double the output of
anything meaningful. In most cases these non-transcribing DNA sequences are just
termed Junk DNA, for obvious reasons.
---
The Investors IP Law: The
future health of a Corporation is measured as the inverse of the number of IP
lawsuits they are currently litigating. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
