This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Myriad Genetics article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
No mention is made of Peter Meldrum in the "key people section", even though Walter Gilbert is of minimal relevance compared to him. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.76.134.58 ( talk) 02:39, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
I represent Myriad Genetics and I am editing the following on this page: creating a Legislation and litigation section, moving most of the information in the Public and Corporate appeal section into the Legislation and litigation section, changing the first paragraph as Myriad Genetics is no longer developing drug candidates in the areas of Alzheimer's disease since its pharmaceutical division broke off into a separate company called Myriad Pharma, finally I will be removing the statement 'Myriad Genetics has been referred to as "probably the most hated diagnostics company" for its refusal to license its products to any other company.' because its source quotes the statement but never provides a source, and it is an opinion and not factual. I will also be restoring more information about Myriad Genetics that was once here.
—Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Radams96 (
talk •
contribs) 14:50, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
I am currently enrolled in a University course and our current assignment is to suggest some things to an article.When discussing the products Myriad has launched, discuss all products in-depth so readers know the extent of Myriad’s releases. Not all are explained fully but doing so could help illustrate the wide span of products Myriad offers. Also, under the “Controversies” heading, it says “… for a price many described as outrageous…” and while there is a citation at the end of the sentence, the phrase should be reworded so it is more clear who exactly considers it outrageous. Lastly, the discoveries of BRCA1 and BRCA2 are major, so perhaps instead of listing the co-discoverers, discuss a little bit about how each one contributed and how this affected Myriad Genetics.
Laponsi2 (
talk) 18:12, 18 September 2016 (UTC)laponsi2
This biotechnology company, based in Salt Lake City, Utah, holds controversial medical genetics patents, including 9 patents associated with the genomic sequences for BRCA1 and BRCA2. Myriad Genetics makes astonishing claims about what these patents cover. Through litigation and potential litigation, they have amassed a complete portfolio of patents on these two genes, linked to familial breast and ovarian cancer as well as several other cancers. Many others dispute their patent claims, and accuse Myriad of stifling research and innovation by others, while charging excessive fees for its own services. Considering the scope and importance of this matter, Wikipdedia has very little information.
The current Wikipedia page has only minimal information about Myriad, so I looked at the page history. I discovered that the article was recently much longer, but that most of its substance had been removed by an person identifiable only by an IP address. I attempted to run both traceroute and DNSreverselookup on this possible troll, but the IP address used was impossible to trace. In addition to removing most of the material in the article, some anonymous person has also erased several messages in the Talk section.
Myriad is a volatile biotechnology stock in which there is intense speculative investor interest. It has a market capitalization of well over $2.5 billion, even after the current stock market meltdown.
Anybody who Googles a phrase such as "Myriad BRCA1 patent" or "Myriad BRCA2 patent" will discover that this is complex public policy question. I naturally wondered whether someone had edited Wikipedia to delete negative information about Myriad. I was especially suspicious because the Talk page had been altered too. However, when I looked at previous versions, none of them seemed to make any serious attempt to present the controversy that surrounds Myriad. Indeed, all of the old versions of this page appear to contain nothing more than public relations material that might be presented in an annual report.
I wish that I had the time and energy to give Wikipedia a good page about Myriad, but I do not. However, I feel that I must warn other Wikipedia editors that there appears to be manipulation of this content by interested parties. The Myriad Genetics page should, at minimum, be restricted to editing by Wikipedians with a valid name and login. We need to have further investigation of the possibility of manipulation. Can an administrator help? Metzenberg ( talk) 03:53, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
Controversies other business conduct could be fleshed out from this ref:
http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/95/1/8
Article talks about 2013 court case ... no update(s)? 66.81.252.240 ( talk) 00:12, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
The following is almost entirely unsourced; just inverting and lightly editing the page at the Myriad website here.
I moved it here per WP:PRESERVE. Per WP:BURDEN please do not restore without finding independent, reliable sources, checking the content against them, and citing them, and ensuring that this content has appropriate WP:WEIGHT in the article overall.
Please be aware that per WP:PROMO: Wikipedia is not for..... Advertising, marketing or public relations. Information about companies and products must be written in an objective and unbiased style, free of puffery. All article topics must be verifiable with independent, third-party sources, so articles about very small "garage" or local companies are typically unacceptable. Wikipedia articles about a company or organization are not an extension of their website or other social media marketing efforts. External links to commercial organizations are acceptable if they identify notable organizations which are the topic of the article. Wikipedia neither endorses organizations nor runs affiliate programs. See also Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) for guidelines on corporate notability. Those promoting causes or events, or issuing public service announcements, even if noncommercial, should use a forum other than Wikipedia to do so. Contributors must disclose any payments they receive for editing Wikipedia. See also Wikipedia:Conflict of interest.
Please note the " Wikipedia articles about a company or organization are not an extension of their website" piece of that.
References
-- Jytdog ( talk) 03:01, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
This too is unsourced - see above
-- Jytdog ( talk) 03:03, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Myriad Genetics. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 03:29, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
@ Jytdog: I can see that my editions on Myriad Genetics were weighted, but how would you suggest making them more neutral? The current paragraph includes errors such as, "Patenting genes has been an established practice since the beginning of genetic research," which the listed source (blog post) does not support; it states that the first genetic patent was in 1980, which is also not entirely accurate. It also somewhat trivializes the concern regarding the patent. Additionally, the statement that the patent "did not interfere with scientists’ ability to study the gene" is also not accurate because scientists had to first get permission for any non-negligible study and had to pay a fee for doing so, as noted by the source I listed in my edit. I'm just not entirely sure how to edit or replace the current sentence stating otherwise without making the section weighted in the other direction. Lastly, the final sentence of the paragraph seems to directly support the prior argument and try to invalidate concerns that scientists have difficulties publishing papers under the described restrictions. I was thinking of simply altogether removing it.
MaxtonTheGreat ( talk) 23:04, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Myriad Genetics article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
No mention is made of Peter Meldrum in the "key people section", even though Walter Gilbert is of minimal relevance compared to him. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.76.134.58 ( talk) 02:39, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
I represent Myriad Genetics and I am editing the following on this page: creating a Legislation and litigation section, moving most of the information in the Public and Corporate appeal section into the Legislation and litigation section, changing the first paragraph as Myriad Genetics is no longer developing drug candidates in the areas of Alzheimer's disease since its pharmaceutical division broke off into a separate company called Myriad Pharma, finally I will be removing the statement 'Myriad Genetics has been referred to as "probably the most hated diagnostics company" for its refusal to license its products to any other company.' because its source quotes the statement but never provides a source, and it is an opinion and not factual. I will also be restoring more information about Myriad Genetics that was once here.
—Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Radams96 (
talk •
contribs) 14:50, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
I am currently enrolled in a University course and our current assignment is to suggest some things to an article.When discussing the products Myriad has launched, discuss all products in-depth so readers know the extent of Myriad’s releases. Not all are explained fully but doing so could help illustrate the wide span of products Myriad offers. Also, under the “Controversies” heading, it says “… for a price many described as outrageous…” and while there is a citation at the end of the sentence, the phrase should be reworded so it is more clear who exactly considers it outrageous. Lastly, the discoveries of BRCA1 and BRCA2 are major, so perhaps instead of listing the co-discoverers, discuss a little bit about how each one contributed and how this affected Myriad Genetics.
Laponsi2 (
talk) 18:12, 18 September 2016 (UTC)laponsi2
This biotechnology company, based in Salt Lake City, Utah, holds controversial medical genetics patents, including 9 patents associated with the genomic sequences for BRCA1 and BRCA2. Myriad Genetics makes astonishing claims about what these patents cover. Through litigation and potential litigation, they have amassed a complete portfolio of patents on these two genes, linked to familial breast and ovarian cancer as well as several other cancers. Many others dispute their patent claims, and accuse Myriad of stifling research and innovation by others, while charging excessive fees for its own services. Considering the scope and importance of this matter, Wikipdedia has very little information.
The current Wikipedia page has only minimal information about Myriad, so I looked at the page history. I discovered that the article was recently much longer, but that most of its substance had been removed by an person identifiable only by an IP address. I attempted to run both traceroute and DNSreverselookup on this possible troll, but the IP address used was impossible to trace. In addition to removing most of the material in the article, some anonymous person has also erased several messages in the Talk section.
Myriad is a volatile biotechnology stock in which there is intense speculative investor interest. It has a market capitalization of well over $2.5 billion, even after the current stock market meltdown.
Anybody who Googles a phrase such as "Myriad BRCA1 patent" or "Myriad BRCA2 patent" will discover that this is complex public policy question. I naturally wondered whether someone had edited Wikipedia to delete negative information about Myriad. I was especially suspicious because the Talk page had been altered too. However, when I looked at previous versions, none of them seemed to make any serious attempt to present the controversy that surrounds Myriad. Indeed, all of the old versions of this page appear to contain nothing more than public relations material that might be presented in an annual report.
I wish that I had the time and energy to give Wikipedia a good page about Myriad, but I do not. However, I feel that I must warn other Wikipedia editors that there appears to be manipulation of this content by interested parties. The Myriad Genetics page should, at minimum, be restricted to editing by Wikipedians with a valid name and login. We need to have further investigation of the possibility of manipulation. Can an administrator help? Metzenberg ( talk) 03:53, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
Controversies other business conduct could be fleshed out from this ref:
http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/95/1/8
Article talks about 2013 court case ... no update(s)? 66.81.252.240 ( talk) 00:12, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
The following is almost entirely unsourced; just inverting and lightly editing the page at the Myriad website here.
I moved it here per WP:PRESERVE. Per WP:BURDEN please do not restore without finding independent, reliable sources, checking the content against them, and citing them, and ensuring that this content has appropriate WP:WEIGHT in the article overall.
Please be aware that per WP:PROMO: Wikipedia is not for..... Advertising, marketing or public relations. Information about companies and products must be written in an objective and unbiased style, free of puffery. All article topics must be verifiable with independent, third-party sources, so articles about very small "garage" or local companies are typically unacceptable. Wikipedia articles about a company or organization are not an extension of their website or other social media marketing efforts. External links to commercial organizations are acceptable if they identify notable organizations which are the topic of the article. Wikipedia neither endorses organizations nor runs affiliate programs. See also Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) for guidelines on corporate notability. Those promoting causes or events, or issuing public service announcements, even if noncommercial, should use a forum other than Wikipedia to do so. Contributors must disclose any payments they receive for editing Wikipedia. See also Wikipedia:Conflict of interest.
Please note the " Wikipedia articles about a company or organization are not an extension of their website" piece of that.
References
-- Jytdog ( talk) 03:01, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
This too is unsourced - see above
-- Jytdog ( talk) 03:03, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Myriad Genetics. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 03:29, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
@ Jytdog: I can see that my editions on Myriad Genetics were weighted, but how would you suggest making them more neutral? The current paragraph includes errors such as, "Patenting genes has been an established practice since the beginning of genetic research," which the listed source (blog post) does not support; it states that the first genetic patent was in 1980, which is also not entirely accurate. It also somewhat trivializes the concern regarding the patent. Additionally, the statement that the patent "did not interfere with scientists’ ability to study the gene" is also not accurate because scientists had to first get permission for any non-negligible study and had to pay a fee for doing so, as noted by the source I listed in my edit. I'm just not entirely sure how to edit or replace the current sentence stating otherwise without making the section weighted in the other direction. Lastly, the final sentence of the paragraph seems to directly support the prior argument and try to invalidate concerns that scientists have difficulties publishing papers under the described restrictions. I was thinking of simply altogether removing it.
MaxtonTheGreat ( talk) 23:04, 23 August 2018 (UTC)