ssage-
> From: CCP4 bulletin board [mailto:ccp...@jiscmail.ac.uk] On Behalf Of
> Kevin Cowtan
> Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 5:02 AM
> To: CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK
> Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] New human genome policy - please read.
>
> Why molecular weight? That's just arbi
In a powerful counter-proposal I recommend that human genes be named after
actual people. I think many of us have heard of the star catalogue - for
fifty bucks you can have a star named after you (not sure if they still do
this). So, the same deal applies - only a bit more expensive because
there's
Why molecular weight? That's just arbitrary.
There is a simple way of referring to proteins which avoids any
ambiguity - by it's sequence. When referring to a protein, we should use
its sequence as an identifier. No ambiguity.
Now, I understand that some smart people in America are now solvin
I think actually *naming* the proteins would be too extreme. Even the
current alpha-numeric system is overwrought. I liked it better when we
just called proteins "p75" or "p105". For instance, how many proteins
in the human genome are 75 kD, anyway? My guess is not enough to make
the situat
April Fools Day? I hope so!!
-Original Message-
From: CCP4 bulletin board [mailto:ccp...@jiscmail.ac.uk] On Behalf Of
Frank von Delft
Sent: 01 April 2009 11:16
To: CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Subject: [ccp4bb] New human genome policy - please read.
H... just saw this
H... just saw this. !!!?!??!
The International Human Genome Organization (HUGO) has announced its intention
to commercialize the naming of human genes. They put it out for public
consultation, and are asking
