quote:

Inventors:     Hampson; Aidan J. (Irvine, CA), Axelrod; Julius (Rockville, MD), Grimaldi; Maurizio (Bethesda, MD)
Assignee:     The United States of America as represented by the Department of Health and Human Services (Washington, DC)
Appl. No.:     09/674,028
Filed:     February 2, 2001
PCT Filed:     April 21, 1999
PCT No.:     PCT/US99/08769
PCT Pub. No.:     WO99/53917
PCT Pub. Date:     October 28, 1999

Current U.S. Class:     514/454
Current International Class:     A61K 31/35 (20060101); A61K 031/35 ()
Field of Search:     514/454



Cannabinoids as antioxidants and neuroprotectants


As used herein, a "cannabinoid" is a chemical compound (such as cannabinol, THC or cannabidiol) that is found in the plant species Cannabis saliva (marijuana), and metabolites and synthetic analogues thereof that may or may not have psychoactive properties. Cannabinoids therefore include (without limitation) compounds (such as THC) that have high affinity for the cannabinoid receptor (for example K.sub.i <250 nM), and compounds that do not have significant affinity for the cannabinoid receptor (such as cannabidiol, CBD). Cannabinoids also include compounds that have a characteristic dibenzopyran ring structure (of the type seen in THC) and cannabinoids which do not possess a pyran ring (such as cannabidiol). Hence a partial list of cannabinoids includes THC, CBD, dimethyl heptylpentyl cannabidiol (DMHP-CBD), 6,12-dihydro-6-hydroxy-cannabidiol (described in U.S. Pat. No. 5,227,537, incorporated by reference); (3S,4R)-7-hydroxy-.DELTA..sup.6 -tetrahydrocannabinol homologs and derivatives described in U.S. Pat. No. 4,876,276, incorporated by reference; (+)-4-[4-DMH-2,6-diacetoxy-phenyl]-2-carboxy-6,6-dimethylbicyclo[3.1. 1]hept-2-en, and other 4-phenylpinene derivatives disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 5,434,295, which is incorporated by reference; and cannabidiol (-)(CBD) analogs such as (-)CBD-monomethylether, (-)CBD dimethyl ether; (-)CBD diacetate; (-)3'-acetyl-CBD monoacetate; and .+-.AF11, all of which are disclosed in Consroe et al., J. Clin. Phannacol. 21:428S-436S, 1981, which is also incorporated by reference. Many other cannabinoids are similarly disclosed in Agurell et al., Pharmacol. Rev. 38:31-43, 1986, which is also incorporated by reference.

quote:

Not only did the gubafia steal Burzinski'a antineoplaston patents for CURING cancer once and for all, but now this?

quote:


Your comment about a gene patent from 2007 is real

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

Not only did the gubafia steal Burzinski'a antineoplaston patents for CURING cancer once and for all, but now this?

This isnt a "now" moment.

Your comment about a gene patent from 2007 is really not germane to my post.

But, since you asked for the status.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-977

Status:
Introduced Feb 9, 2007
Referred to Committee View Committee Assignments
Reported by Committee (did not occur)
House Vote (did not occur)
Senate Vote (did not occur)
Signed by President (did not occur)

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

It may interest you to know that taking out a patent is not really related in any meaningful way to its manufacture and use.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

My post wasnt about gene therapy. Really R0, you should read better than this.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
They have no legitimate authority by any devises to control by legislation, force, claim of ownership or otherwise the use of ANY read ANY read ALL read I dont give a damn WHAT as in ANY fucking drug and prevent people from using them PERIOD.

quote:

This isnt a "now" moment.

Your comment about a gene patent from 2007 is really not germane to my post.

But, since you asked for the status.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

http://www.collarchat.com/fb.asp?m=3953494

Post 5.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kalikshama

quote:

This isnt a "now" moment.

Your comment about a gene patent from 2007 is really not germane to my post.

But, since you asked for the status.

Thanks!

BTW, I wasn't responding to you or RO, but to the broader topic of patenting life, which I think is ridiculous.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/harriet-a-washington/gene-patenting-produces-p_b_645862.html

"How does it feel to be patented? There was a sense of betrayal. I mean, they owned a part of me that I could never recover. I certainly have no objection to scientific research ... but it was like a rape. In a sense, you've been violated, for dollars. My genetic essence is held captive."
--John Moore, the subject of US Patent No. 4,438,032

...Industry, which holds the purse strings and the patents, has largely abandoned the quest for cures to pursue cheaper avenues to maximizing profits on virus, medication and tissue patents. Still worse, our very bodies are being mined for corporate profits, with or without our consent. Legal and ethical conflicts with patient interests are inevitable because the tissues in question reside within or emanate from our bodies, but biotech and pharmaceutical companies control them, becoming, in effect, our biological landlords. In 1984, John Moore became the subject of Patent No. 4,438,032 when his physicians David Golde and UCLA surreptitiously patented a cell line from his cancerous spleen. In 1984 Golde struck a $3 billion deal with Sandoz to produce and refine nine valuable cancer-fighting pharmaceuticals produced by Moore's spleen. The organ had been removed as part of Moore's treatment for hairy cell leukemia but Golde had withheld its true value from Moore and misled Moore about the real reason why he was periodically extracting Moore's blood, tissue, bone marrow and semen, not as part of his therapy for the research laboratory. When Moore sued for rights to his own tissues he lost consistently in the courts, culminating in a Supreme Court decision for Golde and UCLA that noted its trepidation that a victory for Moore would have a chilling effect on medical research.