Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Biology's McGyver: DIY DNA P.C.R.

Posted by michael on from the cheaper-is-better dept.

joesao writes "In this short, charming interview, Dr. Eva Harris talks about popularizing biology by doing what she calls "knowledge-based" technology transfer: "...people purify DNA for P.C.R. processing with a fancy substance made of silica particles, which costs about $100 for a few milliliters. [...] So what we've done is buy a 20-pound bag of ceramic dust for $5 at the hobby store. And you wash the stuff in nitric acid and sterilize it, and then you have thousands of tubes of that substance. We're not violating anything because the commercial manufacturers have their way of doing this, and we have ours." Open-source biology, anyone?"

3 of 55 comments (clear)

  1. talk about a markup! by bscott · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Looks like I.T. markups are tame by comparison...

    --
    Perfectly Normal Industries
  2. Rather hyperbolic by Otter · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I'm sure this work is very valuable, but either she or the reporter (or both) make her come across as far, far more revolutionary than she is.

    For instance, people purify DNA for P.C.R. processing with a fancy substance made of silica particles, which costs about $100 for a few milliliters.

    I incubate a piece of tissue with a couple of cents worth of buffer and proteinase, and then dilute the resulting glop in water. Obviously different protocols call for different methods, but routine clinical preps shouldn't call for anything nearly as elaborate as what she describes. Anyone know what this silica thing she's talking about is? Qiagen spin preps?

    This is called manual cycling. Suddenly, you don't need that $10,000 machine. Now, I didn't discover manual cycling or P.C.R., but I've helped popularize it.

    Uh, no kidding you didn't invent manual cycling. That's how everybody did PCR until the cyclers became available.

    Like I said, I can easily see where it's a very valuable activity to generate manuals and reagent sources for cheap techniques, but the interview makes her sound vastly more inventive than she is.

    --
    What I'm listening to now on Pandora...
    1. Re:Rather hyperbolic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm sure this work is very valuable, but either she or the reporter (or both) make her come across as far, far more revolutionary than she is.

      For instance, people purify DNA for P.C.R. processing with a fancy substance made of silica particles, which costs about $100 for a few milliliters.

      Funny, I read it a different way. I took it as someone who was very politely saying that the 'Propietary' chemical supply stores are robbing medicals blind. If she was an IT worker, I would have expected to hear mention of the DMCA or of a lax Patent Office.