I think it is fair to say, the technology does exists, but too many different super class citizens (mega corporations and NPOs) own the patents on it, so that it is nearly impossible, and way too costly, to assemble the rights, in one place, to create automation. has anyone done a patent search of the owners of the patents that would be needed to be assembled as, owned or licensed, inorder to make a fully functional automated flow cytometer? Science needs to follow, not the developments in new science, but the ownership in the old science. Restricters and retarders ( copyright and patent laws) impede the flow of advancements in science and technology and generated major interference in the development of affordable tools that can be used to forge the future. sterling At 04:27 PM 9/4/2002 -0400, Akos Szilvasi wrote: >We are a rather high volume biotech flow lab. I sent out a desperate >letter over a year ago about the lack of automated cytometers. The >situation is much worse this year. The volume is increasing (we generate >up to 2.6 GB data a month - just analyzes, without the sorter files). Most >of that "manually" on the Caliburs. A genuine, authentic sweatshop like >the ones in Asia making sneakers or other garment. > >The flow cytometry labs are the bottleneck of biotech research. We slow >down the progress by not being able to handle enough samples. The >manufacturers admit the problem, acknowledge the need but in response new >9 color MANUAL cytometers come to the market with the promise of a FUTURE >automated sample handling extension as a teaser. > >The sad and disappointing aspect is that the whole biotech and other >research is automated. The technology is out there. Only we have no access >to it because no one bothers to adopt it (if they can not invent such >devices). > >How do you run 500+ sample experiments? > > >Regards, Akos > >(PS: This is a 10+ years old request. )
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jan 05 2003 - 19:26:25 EST