Difference between revisions of "About Human Genome Project"
| (2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
<p><font size="5">The "Human Genome Project" (HGP)</font><br /> | <p><font size="5">The "Human Genome Project" (HGP)</font><br /> | ||
<br /> | <br /> | ||
| − | <font size="4">It did | + | <font size="4">It did contribute much to biology. However, the amount of money used and the way it was done (process) were not the best example of performing scientific projects.<br /> |
<br /> | <br /> | ||
1. Was it really a 'human' project? <br /> | 1. Was it really a 'human' project? <br /> | ||
| − | No, it was not for the whole humanity. How much consideration was put in for all ethnic groups? It is more a "Caucasian Genome <strong>Sequencing</strong> Project".<br /> | + | No, it was not for the whole humanity. How much consideration was put in for all ethnic groups? It is more of a "Caucasian Genome <strong>Sequencing</strong> Project".<br /> |
<br /> | <br /> | ||
| − | 2. Was it scientific?<br /> | + | 2. Was it very scientific?<br /> |
No, it was more commercially driven with commerical promises that eventually helped the biological stock market disaster and giving bad names to biological ventures.<br /> | No, it was more commercially driven with commerical promises that eventually helped the biological stock market disaster and giving bad names to biological ventures.<br /> | ||
<br /> | <br /> | ||
Latest revision as of 20:01, 9 November 2008
The "Human Genome Project" (HGP)
It did contribute much to biology. However, the amount of money used and the way it was done (process) were not the best example of performing scientific projects.
1. Was it really a 'human' project?
No, it was not for the whole humanity. How much consideration was put in for all ethnic groups? It is more of a "Caucasian Genome Sequencing Project".
2. Was it very scientific?
No, it was more commercially driven with commerical promises that eventually helped the biological stock market disaster and giving bad names to biological ventures.
3. Was it so meaningful?
If $3 USD was used not for 'sequencing' but for actually understanding the human genomes, it would have been much more meaningful.
Genome Sequencing Project is not necessarily 'genomics'. It is a small part of it.
4. Was it sound in principle?
It seems it was full of hype and big egos involving an old technology accompanied by huge amount of money by fairly new comers of the field.
5. Is it useful?
Yes. As it is free (instead being owned by a company).
