This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I made this page because I was surprised to find it lacking from Wikipedia. If anyone can flesh it out with more information (particularly from the US) I'd be very glad - Zeb Edee.
Zeb Edee, would you consider combining this page with the Personalized medicine page? Perhaps it's just a difference in naming. - alane4writing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alane4writing ( talk • contribs) 01:03, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
In large part, vitamins and other nutrients were the primary materials previously studied and available at the 1950s dawn of molecular medicine. Pauling and Roger J Williams (e.g. acknowledged in Principles of Molecular Medicine) represented major figures who directed research, conceptualized, and defined major parts of early molecular medicine during the period, 1940s-1960s, their perspectives often nutrient and metabolism based as well as genetic.
Most controlling patents on basic nutrients were expired or expiring by the 1950s, if not precluded in toto by published papers and "know-how". For economic reasons, grant, rent or other profit seeking institutions inherently had to move to new molecular species and frontiers. Also many substantial groups have sought from the very beginning to directly control the manufacture, distribution and/or recommendation of nutrient based health & medicine (e.g. the long running 1930s legal battles between the pharmacies and the grocery chains over "merely" selling vitamins). Although to the younger or more positioned readers, genetic and (re-)engineered substances may appear to be a sine qua non element of molecular medicine, such a supposition is simply ahistorical. The 1940-50s science and technologies that introduced molecular medicine have continued to evolve alongside Pauling's orthomolecular medicine definition although long deprecated and attacked by elements of large and well funded groups, often *some* of the "-seekers", mentioned above. As for orthomolecular medicine, although which allegory such as "bastard sibling" or "siamese twin" might better reflect common biases in some segments, OMM is inherently a subset of literal "molecular medicine".-- TheNautilus ( talk) 21:35, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I made this page because I was surprised to find it lacking from Wikipedia. If anyone can flesh it out with more information (particularly from the US) I'd be very glad - Zeb Edee.
Zeb Edee, would you consider combining this page with the Personalized medicine page? Perhaps it's just a difference in naming. - alane4writing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alane4writing ( talk • contribs) 01:03, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
In large part, vitamins and other nutrients were the primary materials previously studied and available at the 1950s dawn of molecular medicine. Pauling and Roger J Williams (e.g. acknowledged in Principles of Molecular Medicine) represented major figures who directed research, conceptualized, and defined major parts of early molecular medicine during the period, 1940s-1960s, their perspectives often nutrient and metabolism based as well as genetic.
Most controlling patents on basic nutrients were expired or expiring by the 1950s, if not precluded in toto by published papers and "know-how". For economic reasons, grant, rent or other profit seeking institutions inherently had to move to new molecular species and frontiers. Also many substantial groups have sought from the very beginning to directly control the manufacture, distribution and/or recommendation of nutrient based health & medicine (e.g. the long running 1930s legal battles between the pharmacies and the grocery chains over "merely" selling vitamins). Although to the younger or more positioned readers, genetic and (re-)engineered substances may appear to be a sine qua non element of molecular medicine, such a supposition is simply ahistorical. The 1940-50s science and technologies that introduced molecular medicine have continued to evolve alongside Pauling's orthomolecular medicine definition although long deprecated and attacked by elements of large and well funded groups, often *some* of the "-seekers", mentioned above. As for orthomolecular medicine, although which allegory such as "bastard sibling" or "siamese twin" might better reflect common biases in some segments, OMM is inherently a subset of literal "molecular medicine".-- TheNautilus ( talk) 21:35, 31 July 2008 (UTC)