I'm somewhat lost in your analogies but appreciate your time. Moderna claimed the sequence (MSH3_mut) in their submission to the Genbank patent database. Now, they either supplied the cell line knowingly, unknowingly, or the sequence was used without their permission in a locally made cell line despite Moderna registering that gene in the genbank patent database.
I'm somewhat lost in your analogies but appreciate your time. Moderna claimed the sequence (MSH3_mut) in their submission to the Genbank patent database. Now, they either supplied the cell line knowingly, unknowingly, or the sequence was used without their permission in a locally made cell line despite Moderna registering that gene in the genbank patent database.
Will the fact that the virus has the MSH3 sequence in it cause the cells to over produce MSH3? I’ve heard that this may be a problem because too much MSH3 can cause DNA repair deficiency.
I'm somewhat lost in your analogies but appreciate your time. Moderna claimed the sequence (MSH3_mut) in their submission to the Genbank patent database. Now, they either supplied the cell line knowingly, unknowingly, or the sequence was used without their permission in a locally made cell line despite Moderna registering that gene in the genbank patent database.
Will the fact that the virus has the MSH3 sequence in it cause the cells to over produce MSH3? I’ve heard that this may be a problem because too much MSH3 can cause DNA repair deficiency.