Modified bacteria.

[Bagseed]

I was the first who had this idea, and others simply copied it!

first of all, genetically modifying bacteria to produce chemicals is not a new idea at all, and besides that, how can you be sure that you were the "first one" to have this idea? and even if so (impossible to prove), how does this make you "own" the idea?

 

[Memeito]

So what was your idea exactly?
"Make bacteria that produce opioids as part of their normal metabolism"? Because like serotonin2A said, the hard part is making the idea work. It's not like they suddenly came together and said "hey, let's make E. coli produce opioids... that be cool, right?", and had it done the next day. If it was that easy, then everyone would do it.

But you need the idea first, right????

first of all, genetically modifying bacteria to produce chemicals is not a new idea at all, and besides that, how can you be sure that you were the "first one" to have this idea? and even if so (impossible to prove), how does this make you "own" the idea?

Yes, I knew about modified bacteria to produce insulin, growth hormone, interferon and other substances, and I remember that one day I saw for sale on the Internet various kits containing yeasts and bacteria to make wine, yogurt, kefir, kombucha and other fermented drinks...So in a rare stroke of genius, I thought to myself: "why not make a bacteria that will produce drugs just as easily as you make wine or yogurt?"...And the rest is history....

 

[Weltmeister]

Would it be possible to modify the bacteria who live in the human intestines to produce THC so every time you would eat a certain food youd get high as hell ? Damn i need to patent this because im probably the first human to ever think of this idea

 

[Bagseed]

Yes, I knew about modified bacteria to produce insulin, growth hormone, interferon and other substances, and I remember that one day I saw for sale on the Internet various kits containing yeasts and bacteria to make wine, yogurt, kefir, kombucha and other fermented drinks...So in a rare stroke of genius, I thought to myself: "why not make a bacteria that will produce drugs just as easily as you make wine or yogurt?"...And the rest is history....

still, how do you know that you were really the first person to come up with the idea?

 

[belligerent drunk]

still, how do you know that you were really the first person to come up with the idea?

That's not even really the point. An idea is just an idea. Unless you can provide a plausible course of action on how to make it work, it's worthless. I doubt he proposed steps on what genes to include into the genome of the bacterium and how to perform everything. Or anything at all. Sure, I can say that "I have an idea! Why not make yeast that produces LSD in appreciable quantities and is easy to separate from?". Does that mean I proposed anything worthy? No.

Scientists are not stupid. If making things like this were easy, then anyone could do it. If it was only about coming up with the "idea". But there's a reason a select group of people get paid (*ahem* not always enough!) for doing it.

 

[Bagseed]

^yeah I know, but this guy seems to be so sure that he is in fact the first one to come up with this idea that's why I question it specifically...

 

[Ballz_Trippington]

So this process could be employed to make chemicals that are difficult to synthesis in a lab because of potentially dangerous chemical reactions such as (hypothetically) 4-PO-MET ???
[or really any 4-PO tryptamine]

 

[Bagseed]

I don't really know anything about genetical engineering, but I believe that what is being done is to take parts of the DNA from one species and inserts it into other DNA (like taking the "how to make morphine" sequence out of p. somniferum and putting it into bacterial DNA). I don't think it is yet possible to write completely new and unique "code" and just make it work, but maybe somebody can correct me?

 

[Memeito]

still, how do you know that you were really the first person to come up with the idea?

I remember searching the Internet in 2010 about modified bacteria that could produce alkaloids like morphine or heroin and didn't find much information....

^yeah I know, but this guy seems to be so sure that he is in fact the first one to come up with this idea that's why I question it specifically...

Yes, I think I am the first person, in fact I came up with other revolutionary ideas only to see others implementing them. For example in the 90s when I was only a kid, after I got my first computer, I read a technical book about CD-ROM technology and had a great idea for improving them: instead of having only one reflective layer for storing information, why not have multiple layers sandwiched between transparent sections?
The Blu-ray disc that appeared in the 2000s does exactly this, I'm really mad that I didn't have the chance to actually patent my multi-layered disc....
Anyone knows how can I protect my ideas, I have plenty of them, but not the actual means to implement them...

 

[Bagseed]

thing is you cannot patent an idea, only an actual invention.

 

[roi]

Mr. Special Snowflake, stahp. You're ridiculous.

 

[serotonin2A]

Yeah, this is a ridiculous view of how intellectual property works. Many people have had this same idea. The reason that it took so long to actually develop this process is that it is not trivial to get this to work.

The entire world is now on a first-to-file patent system. That means that it doesn't even matter if you were the first person to get this to work. The person who owns the rights to this is the first person to file patent application, not the one who came up with the idea first or got it to work first.

In the absence of a patent, you can't "own" an idea. You can patent or copyright a process, design, image, sound, text, or trademark. But ideas are not protected. The reason is that ideas have no commercial value. What has value in this case is the process used to engineer the cells, including the genetic construct and how to optimize alkaloid production.

 

[Solipsis]

Yes, 'modifying a bacterium to do something differently like make something' that is basically one of the major avenues of genetic engineering to begin with.

Anyway, very recently there was a breakthrough I think in making one of the most rudimentary synthetic microorganisms possible, obviously very suitable as a vehicle to synth or convert things. I doubt that in the foreseeable future a complete synthesis of a complex / polycyclic biochemical such as opiates would be feasible to get from an organism like that.
It seems likely they won't just research all reactions just because it's neat or highly practical, only the reactions in certain synths that have very low yield otherwise or high cost because of some expensive catalyst etc.
Much later if the technique is developed and more matured I can imagine for compounds that will always be in high demand there might be a big investment that will see its return too. But it's probably one of such economic reasons that would support it best.

@Bagseed: No you cannot just 'write your own DNA code' because it (indirectly) codes for protein synthesis such as enzyme synthesis which would be what organisms use to make biochemicals. Enzymes are like little electromechanical factories made from wiring folded and soldered at the right places, it's difficult to analyze already let alone come up with one; that is insane. So we get inspired by nature instead.

Getting an organism to do absolutely nothing except for staying alive and reproducing and making the enzyme that can easily do a reaction for you that is otherwise very tricky is key - get an enzyme for each step of a reaction for the complete synthesis. But like I said: that would be a luxury, they would mainly focus on the reactions that are actually very hard or expensive normally.