The US Supreme Court’s ruling, which unanimously held that human genes could not be patented, could have lasting effects on the biotech industry
Sometimes the questions are complicated and the answers are simple.” — Dr Seuss
The US Supreme Court has pronounced a judgement that is a step forward for humankind. It ruled unanimously that human genes may not be patented. “The ruling was seen as a powerful statement by the Court on an important intellectual property issue that could have lasting effects on the biotech industry,” wrote the American College of Cardiology’s website on 13 June 2013. Genetic testing and engineering efforts have been a boondoggle for the simple reason that the human meta-genome just has 25,000-odd human genes while there are nearly three trillion germ genes alongside. How could one make any dent in the outcome when one is only able to manipulate a microscopic minority of the genome? Medical science of reductionism has been a great curse for mankind.
Our dependence on randomised controlled trials (RCTs) looks foolish if one understands sub-atomic biology. Human body works as a whole and not in bits and pieces as is being taught now. Trying to predict the future from gene studies is like an astrologer predicting the future of mankind. While we are quick at calling astrology a myth, we foolishly believe that reductionist science of medicine is pure ‘science’. When one applies a little ointment on the dorsum of the hand, even the brain cells change in response, as documented by Fritz-Albert Popp’s bio-photon camera.
The field of medicine, since times of Hippocrates, has been able to survive basically due to ignorance of the masses and the statistical trickery in manipulating the data which, in themselves, are unreliable. We were bleeding, purging and giving emetics to our patients for nearly 2,500 years without anyone questioning that dogma. We are in the same spot today, with no one questioning this dogma of genetic engineering and RCTs. For instance, it is pertinent to note that 89% of the science of cancer and its management are found to be fraudulent; there is so much claptrap about our cancer industry even today. But no one dares to challenge this cancer myth. Genetic engineering, organ transplants, coronary revascularisations and many such quick fixes are just simple myths waiting to be demolished. Yet, the majority is happy at the way medicine is practised as it nets billions of dollars.
Human body is but a bundle of energy and is the other face of the human mind. Naturally holistic disease management must also depend on energy. The good news is that there are pockets of awareness in the world. These oases in the vast desert of ignorance in modern medicine will have to be harnessed and developed for mankind’s good.
All energy comes from the sun through electro-magnetic rays. There are three known types of energies, viz., electro-magnetic, nuclear and gravitational which, together, form just about 5% of the universal energy. A vast majority (95%) of energy remains occult, to date. Professor Robert Becker, a famous orthopod in New York, was the first to show how to use energy to heal infected and complicated fractures. He also devised simple tests to diagnose cancer using electric mapping of the skin areas. He was, of course, demonised and harassed, since he questioned the medical dogmas. His book, The Body Electric: Electromagnetism and the Foundation of Life, should be the Bible for every medical person, young and old alike.
Naturally, the next question would be to make energy treatment for healing the next logical step ahead. The World Academy of Authentic Healing Sciences, (www.waahs.com), a charitable body of scientists from all over the world, has been working to authenticate, scientifically, many kinds of energy-healing methods. The beauty of it all is that these scientific treatments have no side-effects. The demon of adverse drug reactions (ADR) is not a bother for the patient either. The Supreme Court in the US gave a very sensible judgement for which the whole world will be grateful. Let sanity prevail and mankind be happy.
“In three words I can sum up everything I've learned about life: it goes on.” — Robert Frost
Professor Dr BM Hegde, a Padma Bhushan awardee in 2010, is an MD, PhD, FRCP (London, Edinburgh, Glasgow & Dublin), FACC and FAMS.
The Godhra (Gujarat) municipality filed an offence against the builder and the architect of the building under construction that had collapsed in Bhuravav area of town killing a girl and her mother. The municipality has alleged that the building was being constructed in violation of the plans that were passed and its construction too was of inferior quality. The authorities had sent samples to Gujarat Engineering Research Institute for analysis.
The FIR, lodged at Godhra (A Division police station) by the chief executive officer, Nitin Bodat, of Godhra municipality, states that Sanjay Kalvani was constructing the building with Sanjay Doshi as its architect. Mr Bodat has stated that Mr Doshi had put up the plans of the building for construction and it was his responsibility to ensure that construction was as per plans and soil conditions.
A landlady’s family cannot be asked to live separately while her tenant is occupying the rented premises, the Bombay High Court has ruled. Setting to rest a 20-year-old legal dispute between a Thane resident and her tenants, Justice BR Gavai asked the latter to move out. “A tenant or the court can’t dictate to a landlord on what is bona fide and reasonable need... landlord is the best judge of his requirements,” said the judge.
Sudha Barve had rented her flat on the ground floor of Thane’s Shrikripa Building, to Ramesh Padhye in 1974. Ms Barve moved the court seeking his eviction due to non-payment of rent. Also, a crèche was run illegally from the flat and alterations were made to the flat without permission. Ms Barve also said she stayed in a 300-sq-ft flat and needed the place for her family comprising her divorced daughter, son, his wife and their two children. During the case, Ms Barve died. The HC said even after her death, “it cannot be said the space would be enough for the family... consisting of her daughter, son, daughter in law and two children.”