Access
This article is part of Nature's premium content.
Published online 1 October 2008 | Nature | doi:10.1038/455571a
Hwang work granted patent
Australia criticized for issuing a patent for a method the Korean lied about using.
To read this story in full you will need to login or make a payment (see right).
Comments
Reader comments are usually moderated after posting. If you find something offensive or inappropriate, you can speed this process by clicking 'Report this comment' (or, if that doesn't work for you, email webadmin@nature.com). For more controversial topics, we reserve the right to moderate before comments are published.
"Unlike most countries, the Australian patent office does not require authors to sign statements saying that their data are true." Most countries? Name one!
Thank to Nature's effort in overcoming a "technical problem" that has prevented me from being able to login for many days. Now I am posting a comment that I had wished to post as the first one under this news: What about Yamanaka's patent in Japan? Has Yamanaka really proved that he can induce any adult cells (including terminally differentiated ones) back to embryonic or embryonic-like stem cells? Why has he still not performed or performed but not reported those important experiments that I suggested to him and agreed by him for being able to give a definite answer to the question whether the source of his iPS cells is actually pre-existing stem cells or other progenitors? What progress he has made since his iPS research became a national project in Japan? I also wish to ask Cyranoski again: why didn't you follow up with me in order to learn more of some different opinions on iPS cells? Why didn't include some of my opinions on the patentability discussion of iPS cells?---Shi V. Liu (SVL@logibio.com; http://im1.biz; http://blog.sina.com.cn/im1)