THE SEX CHROMOSOME MANIPULATIONS CREATING GENDER BLENDING ARE BEING DONE WITH NO CITIZEN CONSENT---THE CHILDREN AND/OR PARENTS ALMOST NEVER KNOW THESE MANIPULATIONS HAVE OCCURRED.
Remember, we are discussing public policy goals of global 1% in MOVING FORWARD ONE WORLD FOR ONLY THE GLOBAL 1%. Thinking gender blending is liberalization is not the issue in these discussions ---simply supporting equal protection under US Constitution for GBLT already in place does this.
The goal of global 1% in GLOBAL CORPORATE CAMPUS SUSTAINABILITY is creating a workforce which is MOST COST EFFECTIVE. No matter how much global 1% pols and players PRETEND to be creating family-friendly ---women and children-friendly environments --they are doing the OPPOSITE. It is cost effective to have workers not wanting or having children or families-----focused on work only throughout adulthood is the goal. When we think of planetary mining slaves and colonies they don't want workers thinking about needing sex----having children so global 1% are actively BREEDING ALL THIS OUT OF HUMAN NATURE.
'The Worker Bee
Worker bees are all female, but they do not have the same abilities as the queen. They are born sterile and their purpose is to work for their entire lifespan. Worker bees are essentially the lifeblood of the hive. Without worker bees, there would be no one to care for the ever-important queen, produce honey or pollinate plants and flowers. Worker bees are also afforded the privilege of ejecting the unusable drones from the hive.
Worker bees have many jobs throughout their life. The jobs for the worker bee change through their life-span. There are jobs like cell cleaning and capping that are generally handled by younger bees. Guarding and foraging is for the older bees. Worker bees live for about 5 weeks then die - they quite literally work themselves to death to help the survival of the hive.
Bees are neat freaks and because it is the workers bee's job to clean the hive they will remove themselves from the hive before they die so the other bees can get on with their job'.
As we showed earlier, genetic changes especially regarding sex chromosomes often if not always leave that citizens STERILE. Think STERILE WORKER BEES in beehives. This gender blending is affecting both female and male identity------the blending is bring females closer to feeling male-----bringing males closer to feeling female. Both are sterile and we don't know yet but we can think these cases mean they are not sexually attracted to either sex. Do gender blended artificially manipulated sex chromosome citizens not identifying male or female even want to have sex? We do know the goal of global 1% banking is to create the conditions in which these citizens would NOT want to be sexual. So, this threatens not only natural reproduction, it effects the desire to marry and have children. Our GBLT citizens often want marriage---they want to adopt children often using their own sex gametes.
THIS IS TWO VERY DIFFERENT PUBLIC POLICY ISSUES-----
We are being CLINICAL RIGHT NOW in explaining GOALS of artificial manipulation of sex chromosomes in humans. Here we see the same manipulations on lower animals ----in this case controlling mosquito population by genetically sterilizing in this case MALE mosquitoes. The goal was of course having a fertile female mosquito mating with that sterile male and left unable to reproduce.....lowering the population of mosquitoes.
Using male mosquitoes to effectively sterilize females through a naturally occurring bacterium
July 15, 2014
University of Kentucky
A new company, created by scientists, uses a very unique approach to control a common pest that can carry dangerous diseases: using male mosquitoes to effectively sterilize females through a naturally occurring bacterium. "Most mosquito control companies use chemical pesticides which are sprayed out of trucks and planes, or maybe out of a backpack sprayer," one of the scientists said. "By using a natural bacterium called Wolbachia and the mosquitoes' innate ability to find mates, we are applying an approach which does not require chemicals."
Who would have thought of mosquitoes being put to work to help decrease and control the mosquito population? University of Kentucky professor and researcher Stephen Dobson and his former graduate student, Jimmy Mains, that's who.
Dobson, professor of medical and veterinary entomology in the Department of Entomology, College of Agriculture, Food and Environment, and Mains have developed a technology that uses male mosquitoes to effectively sterilize females through a naturally occurring bacterium.
"Most mosquito control companies use chemical pesticides which are sprayed out of trucks and planes, or maybe out of a backpack sprayer," Dobson said. "Ours is a very different approach. By using a natural bacterium called Wolbachia and the mosquitoes' innate ability to find mates, we are applying an approach which does not require chemicals."
Mains is a medical entomologist with the company recently formed by Dobson, MosquitoMate. The principal investigator on the project, Mains earned his Ph.D. from UK in 2012 while working in Dobson's lab. Mains just received a grant from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to begin field trials that both men hope will demonstrate that this technique can be effective across the nation and beyond.
"A big advantage to our method is that the male mosquitoes are 'self-delivering.' We don't need to devote hours in finding and treating all the mosquitoes in your yard. The male mosquitoes find the females for us," Mains said.
Mains and Dobson credit Von Allmen Center for Entrepreneurship, housed within the Gatton College of Business and Economics, with helping them to take their research from the lab to the field. The center assists UK faculty and others in commercializing their research so they can transfer the technologies they have originated to the outside world for eventual far-reaching application.
"MosquitoMate has obtained an experimental use permit for open field releases," said Dobson. "We're now able to apply the bacterium in small defined areas. The idea is to develop data which we can give to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to demonstrate that it works and hopefully, MosquitoMate can move into actual sales and commercial use of the product."
The primary target for MosquitoMate is the Asian tiger mosquito and as the name suggests, it is an introduced pest.
"It came to the U.S. in the mid-1980s and spread throughout the country," Dobson said. "By eliminating this mosquito, we will be going back to a more natural state."
Mosquitoes such as the Asian tiger historically have been much more than a nuisance, transmitting diseases to humans.
"Now we are getting new reports of a new pathogen called the Chikungunya virus, in which there is an epidemic in the Caribbean and we're starting to get cases to show up in the U.S.," said Dobson.
"Recently cases have popped up in the United States, including right here in Kentucky," Mains said.
The researchers believe that at this point, the cases are thought to be from tourists who leave the country, become infected and then return to the U.S. "But there is the concern that we could start having local transmissions where mosquitoes are picking it up and transmitting it here within the U.S.," Dobson said.
Female mosquitoes bite and can transmit pathogens like the Chikungunya virus. Male mosquitoes, though, do not bite, instead they are pollinators. They spend their lives hunting for females and drinking nectar.
"The Asian tiger mosquito is a container breeder," said Mains. "One homeowner's yard can contain hundreds of sites, such as gutters, flower pots, other receptacles and essentially anything that contains water."
Dobson said the MosquitoMate team is rearing large numbers of mosquitoes in the laboratory and removing the females before going to the field.
"We gather the males into cages and then transport the mosquitoes to the targeted site," Dobson said.
"Our employees basically walk around the perimeter of the house releasing the mosquitoes from the cage," said Mains. "This distributes the mosquitoes within the area pretty evenly."
An important advantage of this methodology over the traditional mechanical spraying of pesticides is that chemicals have the potential to affect non-targets, such as bees, butterflies and other insects that are beneficial to the ecosystem. The MosquitoMate approach only impacts female mosquitoes.
In addition to testing in Kentucky, MosquitoMate has collaborators in California, Florida and New York who are carrying out trials to prove that this method can be effective at multiple sites.
Dobson and Mains intend to take the evidence they gather back to the EPA and apply for a full registration, which would enable them to market their technology throughout the U.S. and in time, to other countries around the world that are trying to stop the spread of mosquito-borne diseases to their citizens.
"To play a key role in helping to reduce or eliminate a significant health threat to our population while building a company which potentially will create a large number of new jobs is a thrilling proposition," said Mains. "We believe MosquitoMate can do just that."
Whenever we see discussion of DESIGNER BABIES in national media or by global medical corporate media they always tout goals of curing disease-----marching towards healthier humans------of course we have the EUGENICS in designer babies. That has always been the reason we as a society REJECTED DESIGNER BABIES-----but as important is FOR what are those babies being designed. We see happy faces of happy parents and happy healthy children=====indeed, as all ethics and moral debates are made, citizens having the wealth to build their own baby with traits they think will benefit the parents and child WILL OCCUR.....the cost of this if affordable today to affluent citizens will become very quickly geared to only global 1%----it is only the richest who have ability to bear children with the best traits.
The R and D around all these genetic engineering of babies was of course early on filled with trial and error ---lots of deaths, lots of abnormalities, lots of bad character traits surfacing with what were supposed to be good traits. Genetic manipulation is known to not only create sterility but has also cause learning disabilities, anger and violence management issues, socialization issues------this is what these few decades of CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA have allowed in fetus experimentation and today we have living, breathing, results of those experiments.
Our concern today is not EUGENICS goals---which MOVING FORWARD indeed has------we are shouting for the rights and injustices incurred in these experimental biogenetic programs and procedures with fetuses born and maturing as adults simply seen as medical cases to follow for research ======
THIS IS WHAT HAS BEEN HAPPENING THESE FEW DECADES AND OUR ARTIFICIALLY MANIPULATED GENDER BLENDED CITIZENS ARE VICTIMS NEEDING JUSTICE.
As we stated, most of these biogenetic experiments were done by global 1% CARLYLE GROUP MEETS GLOBAL HEDGE FUND IVY LEAGUE STANFORD AND JOHNS HOPKINS and their global biogenetics corporations created overseas. We don't know the history of failures -----fetuses never born-----fetuses born but not living-----or the history of modified fetuses as children aging now to young adults.....what kinds of medical treatments did these young children need as they aged ----what kinds of psychiatric treatments were they exposed to--------our concern today is the goal of ramping up PRODUCTION OF HUMANS AS PRODUCTS.
By Tia Ghose, Staff Writer | March 13, 2014 02:00pm ET
Creating designer babies who are free from disease and super athletic or smart may finally be around the corner.
But American society hasn't fully thought out the ethical implications for the future of baby making or policies to regulate these techniques, an ethicist argues in an article published today (March 13) in the journal Science.
"We're on the cusp of having much more information, and the appearance of having much greater discretion, in choosing the traits of our children," said article author Thomas H. Murray, a bioethicist at the Hastings Center, a nonprofit research center in Garrison, N.Y. People also need to think about what parents and doctors will do with the technology, he said. "What use will they make of it, and should there be limits?"
In fact, in February, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) met to consider conducting clinical trials to test out genetic manipulation techniques to prevent mitochondrial disease from occurring in offspring.
Since the 1990s, the prospect of futuristic technologies such as human cloning or selecting for superhuman traits have stoked public fears about "designer babies."
Back then, most of these techniques were purely speculative, but now several methods for genetic selection are either already possible or will soon become so.
For instance, parents can choose to screen embryos created via in vitro fertilization (IVF) for sex or diseases, a process known as pre-implantation genetic diagnosis. Scientists have also recently reported a method of extracting defective mitochondria, the energy powerhouses of cells, from a woman's egg and replacing them with healthy mitochondria from a donor egg.
And new tests can detect fetal DNA circulating in a woman's blood stream early on in pregnancy, determining sex or catching errors in the number of chromosomes, Murray told Live Science. Abnormal chromosome numbers cause disorders as Down syndrome. [5 Myths About Fertility Treatments]
And though parents may not be able to screen their future babies for genes that confer intelligence, hair color or athletic aptitude just yet, the company 23andme recently applied for a patent on such tests, the article notes. (Traits such as intelligence and height are governed by a complicated interplay of dozens of genes and the environment, so such tests are still a ways away, Murray said.)
Soon it may be possible to screen the entire genome of a fetus, or to select a child based on its odds of long-term diseases such as Alzheimer's or diabetes, Murray said.
Yet most of the major medical societies, such as the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) and the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), have wildly different attitudes about when and where these techniques should be allowed, the study noted. The ASRM typically defers to a client's wishes on issues such as sex selection, for instance, whereas the ACOG advocates prohibiting sex selection because of its potential to lead to sex discrimination against women in society.
The FDA, meanwhile, only regulates the potential safety and efficacy of these techniques, not their ethical implications.
But when bringing a new child into the world, society has an obligation to determine whether the technologies used to do so actually benefit or harm the infant. On a larger scale, it's possible that giving parents the ability to select the genetic traits of their offspring could subtly worsen the relationship between parents and children.
"One of my concerns is if we let parents think they are actually choosing and controlling [their child's outcome], then we set up all that dynamic of potentially tyrannical expectations over what the child will do or be," Murray said.
But the idea that parents can determine children's eventual identities has always been somewhat illusory.
"You could clone Michael Jordan, but Michael Two might want to be an accountant," Murray said.
Not everyone thinks these ethical issues are so worrisome.
While safety, prospective benefits and medical claims need to be evaluated, designer babies may not present such a new ethical arena, after all. It's not clear that there's anything unique, from an ethical perspective, in parents trying to foster certain traits through genetics as compared to using tutors, music lessons or instilling discipline, said Bonnie Steinbock, a philosopher at the University at Albany, State University of New York (SUNY), who was not involved in the work.
"I don't think there's anything wrong with the attempt to make our children smarter or kinder," Steinbock told Live Science. "If we did think that was wrong, we should give up parenting, and put them out on the street."
And even if there were some potential harms of "designer babies," those drawbacks may not be worth regulating, said John Robertson, a law and bioethics professor at the University of Texas at Austin, who was not involved in the work.
If there were a family that really valued musicality, for instance, and "if they have four embryos and one has the perfect pitch trait, then why should they not be able to choose that embryo?" Robertson said.
The potential harms, such as parents forcing a child to study trombone when the kid would rather play soccer, don't seem big enough to interfere with parental choice, he added.
ALL of the ethical and moral discussions seen in national media always focus only on goals of making children BETTER in the eyes of parents. These discussions almost always come from FAR-RIGHT WING GLOBAL CORPORATE UNIVERSITIES---as this comment below in TEXAS.
Almost NONE of what is rolling out has to do with building the perfect baby for parents-----almost all of this genetic manipulation is about building the perfect workers for each type of employment.
THERE IS NO DISCUSSION ON ETHICS AND MORALS OF THIS GOAL BECAUSE GLOBAL 1% AND THEIR 5% PLAYERS WILL NOT ALLOW THIS GOAL TO BE KNOWN....NO DISCUSSION ON DELIBERATELY ARTIFICIALLY MANIPULATING SEX CHROMOSOMES TO CREATE BLENDED GENDERS WITH STERILITY AND DISCONNECTIONS TO SEX.
"I don't think there's anything wrong with the attempt to make our children smarter or kinder," Steinbock told Live Science. "If we did think that was wrong, we should give up parenting, and put them out on the street."
And even if there were some potential harms of "designer babies," those drawbacks may not be worth regulating, said John Robertson, a law and bioethics professor at the University of Texas at Austin, who was not involved in the work'.
THOSE DRAWBACKS MAY NOT BE WORTH REGULATING-----WHAT AN IDIOT.
We will speak badly of the dead today as MR ROBERTSON is recently deceased. What 99% of WE THE PEOPLE and our global 99% need to understand is this------the very small percentage of people MOVING FORWARD these DESIGNER BABY agendas are all tied to FAR-RIGHT WING AUTHORITARIAN BUSH/CHENEY MEETS CLINTON NEO-LIBERALISM ----doing anything to earn profits. No doubt Texas is tied to bringing back those global biogenetics corporations created these few decades to US and now are pushing data of opinions of
COMPLETELY DEREGULATED CREATION OF ANY KIND OF MANIPULATED TRANS HUMAN WE WANT.
These are the SHIP OF FOOLS----being allowed control of all public policy surrounding what are CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY----FAR-RIGHT WING GLOBAL BUSH NEO-CONSERVATIVE INSTITUTIONS ARE BEHIND NOT ONLY CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY ON THE BATTLEFIELD---BUT IN MEDICAL PROCEDURES.
John A. Robertson
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
For other people named John Robertson, see John Robertson (disambiguation).John A. Robertson (June 15, 1943 – July 5, 2017) held the Vinson and Elkins Chair at The University of Texas School of Law. He wrote and lectured widely on law and bioethical issues.
Robertson was the author of two books on bioethics, The Rights of the Critically Ill and Children of Choice: Freedom and the New Reproductive Technologies, and numerous articles on reproductive rights, genetics, organ transplantation, and human experimentation.
He served on, or had been a consultant to, many national bioethics advisory bodies, and was Chair of the Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Robertson was a fellow of the Hastings Center, an independent bioethics research institution.
YES, WE KNOW and we have known and been shouting these few decades of MOVING FORWARD to only artificial intelligence, robotics, and artificially manipulated especially sex chromosome gender blended citizens will be the ones EMPLOYED.
World Leading Center for Virtually 100% Guaranteed Gender Selection using PGD
Select the Gender of Your Next Baby
Lowest base price of any U.S. PGD gender selection program
Selection Methods Scientific Understanding Scenarios Fees FAQ
Recognized by ABC, NBC, CNN, Fox and Reuters as among "THE" worldwide leaders in gender selection technology. If you want to be certain your next child will be the gender you are hoping for then no other method comes close to PGD (Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis). While traditional sperm-screening techniques have a success rates of 60-70%, only PGD offers virtually 100% accuracy.
Our Gender Selection Program in the Media
Good Morning America
Would You Choose the Gender of Your Next Baby?
Family Balancing with Dr. Steinberg founder of The Fertility Institutes
Gender Selection, Family Balancing and the advances in fertility science with Dr. Steinberg founder of The Fertility Institutes
VICE on HBO
Couple Chooses the Sex of their Baby
Fertility science now allows parents to select the gender of their children. Featuring Dr. Steinberg founder of The Fertility Institutes
Denver ABC: Boy or Girl?
More and more Colorado parents are choosing their baby's gender and more doctors are allowing parents to make the choice.
Boy or Girl?
More videos and articles
World Leading Gender Selection Program
- World leading 100%* Gender Selection with PGD
- Affiliate clinics in over 42 countries
- Lowest base price of any U.S. PGD program
- Screening for over 400 hereditary diseases
- Now combinable with Microsort sperm sorting
- Critical procedures performed by MDs and PhDs
- Full assistance with travel discounts and visas
- Financing available
Free Information Packet! International Programs Available!We are pleased to announce that all medical services offered by The Fertility Institutes are available internationally. We work with affiliate clinics in over 42 countries.
Gender Selection Methods
The selection of gender has been a quest of couples for as far back as recorded history allows. Early drawings from prehistoric times suggest that gender selection efforts were being investigated by our earliest ancestors. Later history shows intense interest in gender selection by early Asian (Chinese), Egyptian and Greek cultures. This is followed by documented scientific efforts beginning in the 1600's to sway the chances of achieving a pregnancy by a variety of methods.
Research and work carried out in the 1980's and 90's have finally provided methods offering the chance of obtaining a desired pregnancy gender outcome that ranges from excellent to virtually guaranteed* with PGD.
The steps and procedures for gender selection are as follows:
- Several eggs are extracted from the mother by our doctors, sperm is supplied by the father.
- The father's sperm is used to fertilize the mother's eggs in our lab.
- After 3 days, several 8-cell embryos will have developed (see figure).
- Our doctor-scientist specialists examine the genetic makeup of the embryos, screening for both genetic diseases and desired gender.
- Healthy embryos of the gender you desire are implanted in the mother.
- Any additional healthy embryos may be cryo-frozen for future use.
- Gestation and birth take place as normal.
The Scientific Understanding of Gender Selection
It has been known for many years that the gender of a pregnancy is determined by the sex chromosome carried by the sperm. Sperm bearing an "X" chromosome, when united with the "X" from the female (females only produce "X") will result in an "XX" pregnancy that produces a female. If a sperm bearing a "Y" chromosome (men have both "X" and "Y" bearing sperm) unites with the "X" chromosome from the female, an "XY" pregnancy will result that gives rise to a male offspring.
Armed with this knowledge, science initially worked to allow for an accurate method of safely separating sperm to allow the majority of those sperm capable of producing the desired gender ("X" sperm or "Y" sperm) to be exposed to the female egg (oocyte). While a variety of methods of purifying the sperm separation process have been reported and studied, in reality, very few of these methods have withstood scientific scrutiny that "checks" the validity of claims made by those employing the procedure.
Because no sperm separation method thus far developed has produced the high level of sperm separation "X" (for female) and "Y" (for male) needed to provide gender outcome success levels greater than 90%, further work to perfect the gender selection process is being studied.
"PGD" (Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis) has taken gender selection to the next and most successful level ever (greater than 99.9%). Results from our PGD process far exceed reported results from any and all other processes:
1. A 7 cell embryo prepared for biopsy on culture day 3
2. A gentle acid solution is applied to the zona "shell" of the embryo, allowing access to the blastomeres contained within
3. The zona "shell" has been penetrated and opened. A single cell is selected for biopsy
4. The selected cell is gently separated from it's neighbor cells and drawn into the biopsy instrument
5. The blastomere is removed. Gender information is contained within the small dimple seen within each cell
6. Separation from the cell is complete and the biopsy probe with the contained cell is drawn away from the embryo
Sperm that have been filtered by our standard sperm preparation process are allowed to fertilize the eggs obtained from the female "in vitro" (in our highly specialized fertility laboratory). The embryos resulting from this specialized fertilization process are then screened by our genetics team to determine both their gender and that selected chromosome pairs have resulted in an expected normal genetic pairing outcome (this process is called "aneuploidy" screening). This gender determination process at the very early development level as made famous by our Center, has resulted in the ability to provide gender selection results for the chosen gender far in excess of 99.9%.
The aneuploidy (abnormal chromosome count) screening process also employed at the time of PGD gender determination also allows for the detection of limited genetic count abnormalities as a routine or for the optional screening of the embryos for a wide variety of additional genetic abnormalities. Upon request, we can screen for genetic abnormalities such as Down's syndrome (one "extra" chromosome 21), Turner's syndrome (the absence of one of the two "X" chromosomes normally found in a female), and Kleinfelter's syndrome (a male with one "Y" chromosome and 2 "X" chromosomes instead of the normally found single "X" chromosome).
New DNA microarray technology also provides us the option of screening embryos for a full (46 chromosome) genetic count. We are also able to provide those patients known to carry specific personal or family genetic diseases the ability to screen the embryos for many specific disorders. All couples meeting our standard, liberal entrance criteria will qualify for the PGD process.
Aneuploidy screening as described above detects abnormal chromosome numbers and the diseases associated with those conditions. "Single gene disorders" include a wide variety of hereditary diseases found on a specific chromosome that can also be screened for with PGD.
Among the diseases detectable with PGD and screened for at our centers:
- Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis
- Becker Muscular Dystrophy
- Beta Thalassemia
- BREAST CANCER
- Central Core Disease
- Centronuclear (Myotubular) Myopathy
- Cerebellar Ataxia
- Charcot-Marie-Tooth Disease
- Chondrodysplasia Punctata
- Congenital Aganglionic Megacolon
- Conradi-Hunnerman Syndrome
- Cystic Fibrosis
- Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy
- Factor VIII Deficiency
- Factor IX Deficiency
- Familial Spastic Paraparesis
- Fragile X Syndrome
- Friedrich's Ataxia
- Gardener Syndrome
- Glycogen Storage Disease
- Happle Syndrome
- Huntington's Disease
- Retinitis Pigmentosa
- Prostate Cancer
- Sickle Cell Anemia
- Tay-Sachs Disease
- Von Willebrand Disease
- Over 400 hereditary diseases
Family Balancing ScenariosCouple 1
Mr. & Mrs. Adams (names are fictitious) present to our offices with a request for gender selection. The couple reports having successfully conceived and delivered three healthy females. The last birth was three years ago. Mr. Adams has a strong family history of girls being born, with his only brother having produced two girls, and three cousins also having had a total of seven female and one male offspring.
Mr. Adams underwent genetic analysis of the "sex ratio" (percentage of "X" and "Y" sperm) of his total sperm production. His ejaculate was found to contain 51% of the viable sperm seen carrying a "Y" (male producing) chromosome. His total sperm count was 38 million per ml. So, of the 38 million sperm, 51% had the correct sex chromosome needed to produce a male. After separating his sperm for the desired gender, we would be left with a sperm count of at best, 15-16 million. This would not be enough to allow for a reasonable chance of the couple conceiving with simple sperm selection and insemination.
Advised of the situation concerning their sperm sex ratio, the couple wisely elected to proceed with the IVF-PGD option. They were rewarded with a twin pregnancy that resulted in the birth of two healthy, male infants. While we exist to provide high quality medical services, we very strictly adhere to guidelines that have a history of providing excellent outcome results. While we cannot "guarantee" a desired outcome to anyone, we can now come as close to a guarantee as science allows. With the IVF-PGD option, success rates approach 100%. Couples in our program can feel comfortable that once treatment begins, they do have a nearly 100% excellent chance of achieving the desired outcome when pregnancy occurs. Consider the next scenario:
This British couple presented to us with a history of having produced three boys over the past seven years. With very few female offspring in either of their families, they were interested in sex selection aimed at the production of a female.
They undertook an initial telephone consultation with me, Dr. Steinberg, that indicated their suitability for our program so long as some initial blood tests the Doctor requested were in order. The blood testing was ordered from a hospital laboratory near their home in London. One week later, the initial blood screening results showed them to be excellent candidates for the gender selection procedure. Total sperm count on the male was 88 million per ml. Sex ratio demonstrated only 38% of his sperm to be "X" (female) producing.
The couple were directed to one of the several fertility centers in London that we work with who assisted us in the preparation of the patients for the procedure. They began their procedure under the co-direction of our program working with the medical team in London. Two weeks later, they arrived in Los Angeles. Their travel and lodging arrangements had been coordinated with our travel desk who had a car meet them at the airport in Los Angeles. They were transported to the hotel they had chosen and the next morning undertook the egg harvest at our facility.
After our modified sperm preparation separation, we obtained 34 million sex selected sperm per ml. from the husband. The PGD analysis of the embryos produced after insemination of the eggs demonstrated 3 healthy female embryos and 7 healthy male embryos, along with 2 abnormal embryos. Two normal female embryos were transferred to the uterus. The couple returned home after two "extra" days of tourism in Los Angeles and two weeks later a pregnancy test was positive. A single healthy female birth resulted.
Lisa and David were referred to us by a local fertility program near their home in Toronto, Canada. They presented to their local program with a request to assist them in their desire to become pregnant with a boy.
Lisa underwent a tubal ligation 3 years earlier after the birth of their third daughter. Lisa and David explained that they felt that they had "reached their limit" after having 3 children and undertook the tubal ligation. They indicated that with their oldest daughters now growing older and able to help with the youngest one, their thoughts had changed and they now felt that they could care for an additional child.
While totally content with their daughters, David indicated that he was very interested in seeing if the couple could use "new science" to help them achieve the birth of a son. Lisa was very supportive and indicated that she too was ready for another child. She indicated that gender was not a concern for her but that she was ready to support David's decision to inquire about our gender selection program.
They were told by their local fertility physician that gender selection was illegal in Canada. He did advise them that he had seen and assisted in the care of several Canadian patients that were being treated for sex selection at our Center in Los Angeles. He suggested to Lisa and David that they come see us. The couple had an initial telephone based consultation with us. This was followed by the performance of blood tests and a semen analysis that was carried out by a laboratory near their home.
We performed a sex ratio on David's sperm that provides us with very valuable information about David's capacity to produce male embryos. After we learned that the couple seemed to be suitable candidates for the procedure, they underwent their initial start-up examinations at the local center. We are able to interface with physicians near the homes of patients in nearly all cases.
Because Lisa was going to be 39 years old at the time of her delivery, the couple opted to also check their embryos genetically to make sure that a pregnancy with Down's syndrome did not result.
Lisa and David achieved a successful male pregnancy that resulted in a healthy baby boy born at Toronto General Hospital. Their referring physician has sent us several additional patients and two of David's friends have now been seen with a request for gender selection.
Dr. Jeffrey Steinberg
Founder of The Fertility Institutes
We will end discussion on effects of transhumanism on all we ordinary human beings-----99% of WE THE PEOPLE black, white, and brown ---men and women citizens------by bringing this back to who are going to be EMPLOYED as 21st century MOVES FORWARD?
We already shout against SMART CITIES with goals of handing most employment categories over to artificial intelligence----to robotics----we have mega-computers designing every move we make inside our schools, on roads and highways, inside corporate campuses, and even inside our homes.....so no need for upper management employees----
What has not been even mentioned is how TRANHUMANS---as in designer workers ----will be a REQUIRED TRAIT for employment left to people still being HUMAN CAPITAL.
This is what will kill the societal structure of marriage, children, family, community, and what we must do to be qualified for a simple JOB.
Please, do not allow artificially manipulated gender blending creating tensions between GBLT VS heterosexual ------our GBLT are citizens some wanting marriage, children, and employment without being ARTIFICIALLY MODIFIED-----especially in regards to sex chromosome gender blending for sterility.
This does not even have anything to do with citizens having wealth to be able to design their children----this is about a global 1% building a world with ONLY THE GLOBAL 1% and everything else genetically or technologically built.
Where these biogenetic goals in transhumanism are now being openly spread to all US global hedge fund IVY LEAGUE biotechnology campuses----it was STANFORD/JOHNS HOPKINS/HOUSTON/AUSTIN TEXAS ground zero for the worst of genetically manipulated humans.......we see here in Baltimore a number of our artificially manipulated sex chromosome blended gender citizens.
Whose Children Will Get the Best Jobs in the 21st Century?
The best jobs will go to applicants who can think.
Posted Apr 12, 2011
With available information in all fields doubling every five years and the access to that information available globally, the best jobs will not go to the person who knows the most facts. Computers will always have the edge on that and when your children enter the workforce in the 21st century, if a computer can do the job, it will.
The best jobs will go to applicants who have the skillsets to analyze information as it becomes available, the flexibility to adapt when what were believed to be facts are revised, and to collaborate with other experts on a global playing field requiring tolerance, willingness to consider alternative perspectives, and articulately communicate one's ideas successfully.
The factory model of education still in place was designed for producing assembly line workers to do assigned tasks correctly. These workers did not need to analyze, create, or question. Automation and computerization are exceeding human ability for doing repetitive tasks and calculations, but the educational model has not changed. In response to more information, students are given bigger books and more to memorize. To provide more time for this additional rote memorization, creative opportunities- the arts, debate, and general P.E. are sacrificed to the alter of more predigested facts to be passively memorized without opportunities for students to discover the connections between isolated facts and build networks of concepts nor opportunities to apply what they learn in other contexts.
This assembly line, test prep system doesn't prepare today's children to what the best job employers are already seeking—the ability to transfer knowledge to new contexts and apply that knowledge along with critical analysis of new information, judgment, creative problem solving, and the ability to evaluate and select which new data and tools can be applied in new ways to solve new problems and create new outcomes.
Without these higher order, cognitive skillsets, today's students will only be prepared for assembly line work, slightly more technological, or service industries. They won't be able to compete on the global employment market with students currently developing the executive functions to succeed at the best, most creative, and personally rewarding jobs. This is not to say that the other types of jobs are not important or that the people who do them are less deserving of respect and appreciation. What is important is that today's students have the education they need to choose the career path that will give them the most satisfaction.
What Are the Skillsets and How Do Your Children Get Them?
What my field of neurology has called "Executive Functions" for over 100 years are these highest cognitive processes. These are skillsets beyond those computers can do because they require flexible, interpretive, creative, and multidimensional thinking—suitable for current and future challenges and opportunities. The executive functions include judgment, prioritizing, planning ahead, interpretation, critical analysis, deduction, induction, pattern recognition and expansion, self-monitoring, self-correcting, abstraction, concept development, flexibility, tolerance, risk assessment, resisting immediate gratification to plan and achieve long-term goals, and creative problem solving.
The control center that directs the brain's executive function is in the prefrontal cortex. Cognitive processing of information that takes place in areas in the prefrontal cortex is also what allows humans to exercise conscious control over our emotions and thoughts. These executive functions are exactly what employers for the top jobs of our children's future will be seeking, because these are what computers can't do.
Where The Human Brain Has the Greatest Advantage
The prime real estate of the prefrontal cortex comprises the highest percentage of brain volume in humans, compared to all other animals, which is roughly 20% of our brains. The executive function control centers in the PFC give us the potential to consider and voluntarily control our thinking, emotional responses, and behavior. It is the reflective "higher brain" compared to the reactive "lower brain".
Animals, compared to humans, are more dependent on their reactive brains to survive in their unpredictable environments that require automatic responses not delayed by complex analysis. As man developed more control of his environment, the luxury of a bigger reflective brain evolved to its current proportions.
The prefrontal cortex is the last part of the brain to mature (the neuroplasticity process of pruning of unused cells to better provide for the metabolic needs of neurons and strengthen the connections in the circuits that are most used). This pruning and strengthening that is highly defining of the type of adults we become continues into the twenties, with the most rapid changes in the age range of 8-16. Until the executive function stimulation comes from schoolwork, parents can intervene and promote the activation and strengthening of these developing brain circuits during these years of most rapid change. The stimulation of these networks during the ages of their rapid development can strongly influence the social-emotional control and the highest thinking skillsets that will determine today's children's opportunities in the global job market they'll enter.
Preparing Your Children for the Challenges and Opportunities of the 21st Century
Help your child develop personal responsibility: Because executive functions, such as organization, prioritizing, resisting immediate gratification, and goal planning are not being developed in the over-stuffed curriculum of predigeted facts that are the focus of current instruction, many students enter college inadequately prepared to succeed in or get the most from those years. We are seeing an increased drop out rate among college students and more students who require five or more years to obtain their college degrees.
During the primary and secondary school years, students often rely on their teachers and parents to keep them on track. Through high school, most teachers take attendance, call on students, hold students accountable for homework, and give assessments with enough frequency for students and parents to know how they are doing. In large college classes students can be anonymous. Once in college, tthere is no more hand-holding, parent-teacher conferences, often no attendance taken, and frequently only a midterm and final exam to show students what they didn't know - usually when it is too late.
With the still immature prefrontal cortex, many college students, who have not had opportunities to develop their executive function circuits, lack the judgment and long-term goal development neural networks to resist the immediate gratification of hiding behind their laptops, surfing the web or checking Facebook instead of staying focused, taking notes, participating in discussions, or asking questions in class...if they go to class at all.
If children aren't prepared early to resist the immediate gratifications that abound during their college years, they miss out on what may be the first opportunity they have to really develop higher-level thinking. If their precollege years in school were overloaded with rote memorization, college could be the opportunity to develop the higher thinking skills—if there is some groundwork laid. The temptations are high and the PFC still immature—a setup for kids to miss out on the knowledge and skillsets that will be sought after for the best jobs.
Your intervention during your children's early development can build the responsibility, goal-planning, and self-directed motivation needed to get the most from their higher education. The children who have opportunities to use and strengthen their developing executive functions early will have greatest likelihood to get the most from lectures, reading, and developing relationships with their teachers. These are the students who will recognize the value of learning opportunities, make the effort to sustain mental focus and participate in discussions in class, and plan ahead for long-term assignments and tests.
Build a Better Brain Now to Get What is Needed for the Best Jobs Later
Here's the challenge for parents. We know that left to its own rate of maturation, the brain's circuits of judgment, prioritizing, and resisting immediate gratification, don't set up until the mid to late 20s, when it is too late to take advantage of the opportunities missed while texting their way through classes. Yet, you can't just tell your children that good work habits, best effort on homework, class participation, building relationships with teachers and professors are critical to future success. Even if you do, the words don't mentally "compute" since their brains are designed to seek pleasure, risks, and peer approval.
Those latter behaviors were important in our animal ancestors who needed to be the standouts in the herd to get a mate, gain status, be assured of their access to the best food, and even herd leadership. But, risk taking and pleasure seeking no longer are the criteria that will standout from the herd of job applicants after graduation.
Some suggestions to work on early
• Children, throughout their educational journey, should be taught how to succeed in school: This includes being explicitly taught how to focus attention, study, organize, prioritize, review and actively participate in class. They should also be provided with motivating, relevant experiences that make evident the reasons for learning the facts or procedures they are given to memorize.
• Making the switch from memorization to mental manipulation: Memorization that was adequate in high school is not the way students are graded in college. In college, and in many jobs, it is more about applying, communicating, and supporting what one knows. Students are asked to demonstrate executive function skills and conceptual knowledge by comparing and contrasting concepts, giving new examples of concepts, and transferring knowledge by applying big ideas to solve new types of problems. When parents provide children with opportunities to apply what they learn in school, they recognize the value of the facts and procedures the are required to memorize so that information becomes activated and incorporated into a larger memory bank instead of pruned away from disuse...and rememorized next year.
As your children will become the citizens, employers, employees, professionals, educators, and caretakers of our planet in 21st century what can you do to help prepare them? What can you promote in their schools to be sure they are equipped with the skillsets they'll need to take on challenges and opportunities we can't yet even imagine?
Judgment builds through predicting, planning, revising, and accountability: Encouraging your children to prioritize and plan can begin by make a game out of having them estimate things such as the amount of time it might take to drive to a location after looking at a map, or how much time they predict it will take to shop for their soccer uniform.
The powerful lessons that follow predictions and estimations take place because the brain is programmed to find out if its predictions are correct. This means that when the actual time is compared to the time a child estimates, her brain will be attentive. This gives you a teachable moment to encourage your child to consider why her estimation was longer or shorter than the final result.
These activities foster the development of accurate prediction and time-use planning that become critical for children's later success with long-term school projects and reports. Helping your child develop the judgment and prediction skills, about time needed for long-term school assignments, avoids the stress, and often, lower quality work, that comes from waiting until the last minute.
The development of the executive function of judgment can grow to include opportunities you give your children for self-checking. You can start with responsibilities that have real, but not critical outcomes, such as having your child pack her own bag for a sleepover, after you've done it together "thinking out loud" as you predicted what she'd need. She'll enjoy the pride of your trust in ultimately letting her pack her own bag. If she forgets her teddy bear or beach towel, she'll experience the consequences of her planning haste and she will be the one motivated to focus on the details with more attention to avoid similar mistakes the next time. You can be supportive, even sympathetic, but not a rescuer. Having her experience the consequences of her inadequate planning shifts responsibility and promotes the construction of those neural networks for judgment and organization in your child's developing brain. These experiences will serve her well in the years to come.
Prioritizing: In school and later on the job, this executive function is what takes place when the brain can distinguish low relevance details from the main ideas, evaluate the order in which to take on tasks and predict which parts of a larger task should get the most time and planning attention. Building this cognitive skill early yields children who grow to make the most efficient use of their time and are equipped to juggle sports, clubs, friends, and homework with foresight.
Start by encouraging younger children to consider which items on a shopping list should be purchased first or last. A lesson about using critical thinking when prioritizing is learned by if you let your child plan the order of errands. If he decides grocery shopping should be done before going to the dry cleaners and stationary store, a lesson in prioritizing takes place when he discovers the ice cream is melted as he unpacks the groceries at home.
These teachable moments apply later when he needs to prioritize his activities and analyze choices before acting—something that can save his life because you provided the opportunities for him to build executive functions that help his reflective brain resist his adolescent, lower brain inclination to choose immediate gratification and succumb to peer pressures without considering consequences or planning for long-term goals.
Setting goals and making considered choices for goal achievement: Unless children develop this executive function, they are limited in their capacity develop realistic and manageable goals. While still under parental watch, children need opportunities to set goals for things they want and to make decisions and deal with choices and uncertainty, rather than be given the answers or told what is right. Starting when children are young and receptive to taking on challenges, but still knowing you have their backs, you can promote the development of their future goal development skills.
Once your child sets a goal within the realm of possibility for his age and skills, if you have provided experiences for him to build up this type of thinking, it can be a powerful brain circuit builder for him to follow through with the plans he makes (or ignore them). He then needs to experience the authentic consequences of his choices, a lower grade or not getting selected for the team, because he chose the immediate gratification of video game playing instead of planning, practicing, or preparing for his larger goal.
This is one of the greatest challenges of parenting as it is far from easy for you to foresee the consequences of choices your children make knowing they could be closing some doors for their future—such as not taking the challenging courses that the most selective colleges expect to see in applications of suitable candidates for admission. Yet, this is when parents looking at the bigger life picture, find the fortitude to withhold pressure and criticism, These are times to resist trying to "fix it" or critique the mistakes made, but rather to encourage your child that there will be larger and more desirable goals coming soon and encouraging him to evaluate what he did right and consider what he could do differently next time.
You may now recognize that some of the judgment, prioritizing, and resisting of immediate gratification strength you now have developed because your parents or a particular teacher gave you opportunities to make your own choices, and experience the consequences, as they gave you the opportunities to build your executive functions.
Communication and Information Analysis: New information is being discovered and disseminated at a phenomenal rate. It is predicted that 50% of facts children are memorizing today will no longer be fully accurate or complete in the near future. Children need to know how to evaluate sources of accurate information and then to use critical analysis to assess the veracity/bias and current/potential uses of new information. These are executive functions children can build with parental guidance from a young age.
One size does not fit all, nor should all children think alike if we are to remain a democratic and progressing society. The current testing system and the curriculum that it has spawned leaves behind the majority of students who do not do their best with the linear, sequential instruction.
Promote deeper thinking and build communication skills by finding out the topics your child will study in the coming school months. Then help promote her interest in the topics by introducing things at home that will help her relateto the topic when it comes up. She will then have the background knowledge and interest that promotes her higher level thinking and participation in class discussions.
Sustain that development by continuing class discussions at home, through current and local events related to your child's interest. These discussions increase the relevance of new learning so it is incorporated into long-term memory. Even more critical, through your encouraging her to make comparisons and express and support her opinions, she is processing new learning through her executive function networks as she forms and defends her opinions, analyzes source reliability, and questions things she hears or reads using her developing critical analysis.
Collaboration: Children of today need opportunities to work in groups, if not is school then in play groups as youngsters, and later in clubs, sports teams, or volunteer organizations to be ready to collaborate and communicate with tolerance and flexibility with others on a global level.
Experiences of Tolerance: In a global world of collaboration communication and openness to unfamiliar cultures and ideas will be a critical skill sought in job applicants in the future. Children benefit from family discussions and experiences that appreciate other cultures. You can start with discussing contributions made throughout the ages to things tyour children enjoy now, such as where and when the sports or foods they like originated... to cultural and language differences. For example, if you try to use even your limited knowledge of their language when speaking with a non-English speaking individual, you are modeling the value of these communication skills for your children.
Turn Learning into Knowledge: Transfer is Using Learning Beyond the Classroom. New "learning" does not become permanent memory unless there is repeated stimulation of the new memory circuits in the brain pathways. This is the "practice makes permanent" aspect of neuroplasticity where neural networks most stimulated develop more dendrites, synapses, and thicker myelin for more efficient information transmission. These stronger networks are less susceptible to pruning and become long-term memory holders.
Children need to use what they learn repeatedly and transfer classroom learning by using it in ways different than the rote drills in which it was practiced. Promoting use of the executive functions stimulates neural networks to communicate and form connections that become concept networks of related information. You know your child's interests and can help him build those networks and stable long-term memories his brain can retain by providing opportunities for him to apply learning in meaningful ways. These "transfers" that relate school learning to real life situations and will protect the isolated rote memories from being pruned because they become incorporated into useful, retrievable, and long-term memory.
You've probably seen the bumper sticker, "If you can read this, thank a teacher." Since you are reading this article, you can clearly do more than basic reading. It is likely you recall at least one teacher who influenced how you learned to think and become the person you are today.
During the past twelve year, after leaving my neurology practice to become a teacher, I first taught elementary, then secondary, and for the past two years have been teaching other educators about how they too can apply neuroscience research to strategies that provide successful, joyful learning experiences for students even with the impossible curriculum demands. During these past several years I've spent time with some of the most extraordinary people I've ever met. These are our children's teachers and they deserve our appreciation and help regaining the opportunity to give their best to all children.
This means making your voice heard locally or to the state and national departments of education regarding more appropriate curriculum for students and professional development opportunities for teachers. Linda Darling-Hammond wrote that in our current educational system accountability is unidirectional and, "Although the child and the school are accountable to the state for test performance, the state is not accountable to the child or school for providing adequate educational resources."
Until the changes are made, you remain the caretaker of your child's development of his or her greatest resources—that of the cognitive development of strong executive functions. As the caretaker of your child's brain, during the years of rapid brain development, it falls to parents to consider the ehighest brain attributes most important to build, and provide the opportunities your children need to achieve their highest potentials as the inherit the challenges and opportunities of their 21st century.
Not all biogenetics corporations are looking at artificial genetic manipulation of sex chromosomes to create gender blended sterile designer humans-----but most of them are tied to trying to be that PATENT towards our human bodies being one big medical technology-tied TELEMEDICINE GUINEA PIG.
What we see on today's stock market are those corporations created overseas when BUSH pretended to be BORN AGAIN TOO CHRISTIAN to manipulate GOD'S CREATION.
Our 5% to the 1% of course have through insider trading invested in these biogenetics corporations been earning a few dollars in dividends---MAKING ALL THIS WORTH IT---READY TO DO ANYTHING GLOBAL 1% TELLS THEM----THEY PLEDGED TO YOU KNOW.
So, too are our 99% WE THE PEOPLE retirement 401Ks----pensions-----our government assets-----Social Security trusts---all invested in these biogenetic corporations manufacturing artificially manipulated humans as better workers.
'M&A in DNAAgainst this backdrop, the race to acquire genetics technologies is heating up.
The recent bid for Life Technologies was an interesting race between Thermo Fisher and private equity (speculation about interested bidders focused on Kohlberg Kravis Roberts, Blackstone, Carlyle and Singapore’s state investor, Temasek)'.
WE CANNOT STOP THIS! OH, REALLY?????
Each nation globally has the power to keep these biogenetics corporations out of their nation including the US------LET'S JUST DO IT!
Genomics companies ripe for flurry of mergers
Published: Apr 16, 2013 1:16 p.m. ET
Commentary: Race to map genome sparking investing interest
TEL AVIV (MarketWatch) — Exactly a decade and a day after the Human Genome Project was completed, the world’s largest maker of DNA testing and analysis tools, Life Technologies Corp. LIFE, +5.63% said that it is set to be acquired by Thermo Fisher Scientific TMO, -1.11% for a record $13.6 billion.
With this deal, a race that kicked into high gear more than 26 years ago is heating up, with foreign governments and corporates joining the U.S. in funding the quest to map all the human genomes. And even as the recent flurry of M&A in the genomics space has spurred returns, investors still have opportunities to profit from this multibillion-dollar industry.
Disease prevention and treatment
In 1987, the Reagan administration launched the $3 billion Human Genome Project to identify and map as many as 25,000 genes of the human genome and thus understand the genetic makeup of the human species. If researchers and drugmakers better understood viruses, diseases and the genetic mutations, the thinking went, they could create more personalized and effective treatments. The project spawned wide international interest and collaborations and was completed on April 14, 2003.
Life Technologies (LIFE)$11.6 bln14.92.8
Illumina (ILMN)$6.9 bln34.15.1
Pacific Biosciences (PACB)$121 mlnNM4.6
Agilent Technologies (A)$14.94 bln14.32.0
Quest Diagnostics (DGX)$9.22 bln12.91.2
Laboratory Corp of America (LH)$8.69 bln13.31.5
Qiagen (QGEN)$4.94 bln18.63.8
Myriad Genetics (MYGN)$2.15 bln15.93.5
Luminex (LMNX)$677 mln38.63.0
Fast forward to 2013, and the opportunities created by genetic testing have stoked both excitement and fear.
If tools become available for physicians to analyze each person’s genome, a patient’s susceptibility to a certain disease could be predicted and preventive measures could be taken. And in fact there is a real market for the technology, with a 2010 Health Economics report suggesting that nearly 90% of patients would consider genetic testing to uncover their risks of contracting certain diseases.
While this is a potential boon for patients and pharmaceutical companies, insurers are less than thrilled. UnitedHealth Group UNH, +0.69% estimates that if genetic testing were made available to mass-market consumers, the costs of these tests could quintuple to $25 billion by 2021. And while cost savings from more tailored drug treatments can be expected, they argue that the technology is new and unproven, and they warn that disclosure of a patient’s genetic susceptibility to disease might make taking out certain types of insurance more difficult.
Costs decline, market grows
Notwithstanding these concerns, the DNA sequencing market has been growing 18% a year and is expected to reach nearly $7 billion in 2016, according to BCC Research. Fueling this growth have been the rapidly falling costs of whole-genome sequencing, which until recently ran as high as $10,000 and are now reaching a point more broadly accessible to consumers.
This has attracted the likes of IBM IBM, -0.13% which is reportedly working on a DNA transistor that could bring sequencing costs down to as little as $100, and Panasonic 6752, -0.15% which confirmed last week it is developing a lab-on-a-chip to enable doctors to conduct rapid DNA analysis.
There’s a lot of money to be made in DNA.
In March 2012, Amazon AMZN, -0.66% the online retail and tech giant, said it was making available for public use the entire contents of the National Institutes of Health’s 1000 Genomes Project, a survey of genetic information from 1,700 individuals. Amazon is giving away free access to this 200 terabytes of data but hopes to make money from researchers by providing large-scale processing and storage of the analyzed data.
Even Google GOOG, -0.80% is positioning itself to get into the space, having invested in several genetics start-ups, including 23andMe, DNAnexus and Navigenics (later sold to Life Technologies in July 2012).
At the government level, it is no different. David Cameron’s U.K. government recently said it has set aside £100 million of funding to cover the sequencing costs of 100,000 cancer patients, to help find better treatments.
High-Speed Wi-Fi? Not So Fast
However, the country to watch is China, which is home to BGI (formerly Beijing Genomics Institute), the world’s premier genome-sequencing center. Having successfully sequenced the SARS virus, BGI has embarked on its own ambitious plan to sequence the genomes of one million people and to establish its own reference baselines for specific populations.
M&A in DNA
Against this backdrop, the race to acquire genetics technologies is heating up.
The recent bid for Life Technologies was an interesting race between Thermo Fisher and private equity (speculation about interested bidders focused on Kohlberg Kravis Roberts, Blackstone, Carlyle and Singapore’s state investor, Temasek). This followed by a few short months BGI’s $118 million acquisition of Complete Genomics Inc., a U.S. provider of whole genome sequencing services. With this acquisition extending BGI’s reach in the U.S., it can now scale and penetrate the US clinical market.
So with Life Technologies being acquired and Complete Genomics going private and others such as Oxford Nanopores and Nabsys closely held, a handful of publicly traded opportunities in the genetics space remain. The largest of these is gene-sequencing company Illumina ILMN, +0.20% which has been fending off advances from Switzerland’s Roche RHHBY, +0.10% [ RO, +0.30% for 18 months. After Illumina thwarted three separate bids of as much as $8 billion, Roche’s chairman said in January that the company was walking away.
But for how long, it is anyone’s guess. Pharmaceutical companies such as Roche, Abbott Laboratories ABT, +0.59% and Amgen AMGN, +1.23% need gene-testing technologies to help in their molecular testing for drug discovery.
Others to watch include Myriad Genetics MYGN, +2.85% a genetic-testing company focused on ovarian and breast cancer, and the clinical lab testing companies Quest Diagnostics DGX, -0.45% and Lab Corp. LH, +0.02% both of which have been the subject of buyout speculation.