18 replies to this topic

[Turnbuckle]

Natural substances are not patentable and therefore not profitable and therefore you will never see the tests you desire.

This is not true. You can patent components of natural products, combinations with natural products, new uses for natural products, methods of synthesizing natural products and the synthesized products themselves, etc.

[AdamI]

Well, Can you patent C60 in olive oil then? And have anyone done it?

[Turnbuckle]

Well, Can you patent C60 in olive oil then? And have anyone done it?

An inventor could try. At present there is no such published patent application, but they aren't published until 18 months after filing.

[Logic]

Thx Turnbuckle. Wasnt aware of that.
So if I make a multi-vit with the RDA of component doses; no one else could deo the same without paying royalties?
(Chinese exepted )

Or do you just add some other ingredient?

[Turnbuckle]

Thx Turnbuckle. Wasnt aware of that.
So if I make a multi-vit with the RDA of component doses; no one else could deo the same without paying royalties?
(Chinese exepted )

Or do you just add some other ingredient?

Not without getting a patent on it.

[Turnbuckle]

Here's an interesting paper which touches on the crosstalk between mitochondria and the nuclear epigenome--ie, if mitochondria aren’t healthy, this can result in hypermethylation of tumor suppressing genes in the nDNA, resulting in cancer.

While it is quite clear that the mitochondrial impairment
commonly seen in cancer cells leads to increased damage to the
nuclear genome and to changes in nuclear gene-expression, the
question of epigenetic changes related to mitochondrial dysfunction
has not been addressed. DNA methylation is an epigenetic
modification of the DNA that is frequently disrupted in nearly all
types of cancer. Hypomethylation of the repetitive elements associated
with increased genomic instability is frequently seen and
the hypermethylation of specific CpG islands in promoter regions
of several tumor-suppressor genes is commonly observed to be
associated with transcriptional silencing of the gene. To date,
it is unclear whether the mtDNA affects epigenetic changes in the
nuclear genome. In this study, we took a genomic-scanning approach
to identifying CpG island methylation changes associated with the
depletion and repletion of mtDNA. Our study suggests that mitochondrial
impairment induces DNA methylation in the nuclear
genome, and that some, but not all, of the changes induced by the
depletion of the mitochondrial genome can be reversed by reintroduction
of wild-type mitochondria.

Source: A novel role for mitochondria in regulating epigenetic modifications in the nucleus

Thus the epigenetic changes in nuclear DNA that promote cancer “can be reversed by reintroduction of wild-type mitochondria,” and it is logical to assume that they might also be reversed by restoring mitochondrial health, which C60 treatment seems to do.

[Anthony_Loera]

Thx Turnbuckle. Wasnt aware of that.
So if I make a multi-vit with the RDA of component doses; no one else could deo the same without paying royalties?
(Chinese exepted )

Or do you just add some other ingredient?

Not without getting a patent on it.

Then you'll need to jump through the FDA hoops, as the material is considered an NDI, and not possible to use in dietary supplements within the United States.

A

[smithx]

Well, Can you patent C60 in olive oil then? And have anyone done it?

In the USA you can't patent anything which you have publicly disclosed or which was publicly disclosed by anyone else.

So unless a patent application was submitted before the Baati paper was submitted for publication, there would be no valid patent granted.

Edited by smithx, 12 November 2012 - 09:13 PM.

[smithx]

Well, Can you patent C60 in olive oil then? And have anyone done it?

An inventor could try. At present there is no such published patent application, but they aren't published until 18 months after filing.

Not exactly true. Patent applications are published unless the inventor/submitter specifies that they do not want publication. In that case, the patent application is never published until or unless the patent is granted.

See: http://www.uspto.gov....html#d0e120159

[Turnbuckle]

Well, Can you patent C60 in olive oil then? And have anyone done it?

An inventor could try. At present there is no such published patent application, but they aren't published until 18 months after filing.

Not exactly true. Patent applications are published unless the inventor/submitter specifies that they do not want publication. In that case, the patent application is never published until or unless the patent is granted.

See: http://www.uspto.gov....html#d0e120159

Yes, that is true if the inventor does not plan on filing in foreign countries. But if the invention is important, they would certainly want to. Certainly in the case of this French group, there would be no nonpublication request as they would be filing overseas.

In the USA you can't patent anything which you have publicly disclosed or which was publicly disclosed by anyone else.

So unless a patent application was submitted before the Baati paper was submitted for publication, there would be no valid patent granted.

While this is true in foreign countries, in the US you have a one year grace period.


Here is the world patent application for C60 in oil, from 2004--

http://worldwide.esp...OC&locale=en_EP

WHAT IS CLAIMED IS:
1. A stable biocompatible composition comprising: (a) a carrier selected from the group consisting of fats, oils, waxes and mixtures thereof; and (b) particles of at least one compound selected from the group consisting of water-insoluble fullerenes, wherein said particles are dispersed and/or dissolved in said carrier.

etc...

Inventors--MOUSSA, FATHI; GHARBI, NAJLA

And another patent application by them claiming C60 as a stabilizer for oil--

http://worldwide.esp...7001188A1&KC=A1

Edited by Turnbuckle, 12 November 2012 - 10:18 PM.

[hav]

Well, Can you patent C60 in olive oil then? And have anyone done it?

In the USA you can't patent anything which you have publicly disclosed or which was publicly disclosed by anyone else.

So unless a patent application was submitted before the Baati paper was submitted for publication, there would be no valid patent granted.

Actually, the basic requirement of section 102 of the patent law is novelty. All that means is you have to be first. The mention in the statute of prior patent applications and/or prior publication are not required (see: 102(f)) but constitute strong evidence against novelty. The hypothetical often used on law school exams of equally strong evidence against novelty might be Indiana Jones discovering your invention in a lost tomb... in which case you lose.

Section 103 specifies a 2nd independent requirement of non-obviousness, which I imagine would probably be the biggest hurdle for the c60-oil patent application. The standard is, "would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains." I don't know if I'm such a person but I'm pretty sure that if I were asked to dissolve something like c60, I'd likely try common solvents. But this is a standard that is tough to keep objective. And Judges don't seem to like it for that reason. Often they ask, "If it was so obvious, why didn't anyone ever do it before?" Which can effectively write the non-obviousness requirement out of the law.

Howard

[maxwatt]

The purpose of this topic is to let members post anecdotal observation that do not rise to the level of scientific evidence, yet hopefully are not without value to the community.

[smithx]

Here is the world patent application for C60 in oil, from 2004--

http://worldwide.esp...OC&locale=en_EP

WHAT IS CLAIMED IS:
1. A stable biocompatible composition comprising: (a) a carrier selected from the group consisting of fats, oils, waxes and mixtures thereof; and (b) particles of at least one compound selected from the group consisting of water-insoluble fullerenes, wherein said particles are dispersed and/or dissolved in said carrier.

etc...

Inventors--MOUSSA, FATHI; GHARBI, NAJLA

And another patent application by them claiming C60 as a stabilizer for oil--

http://worldwide.esp...7001188A1&KC=A1

This is interesting. I didn't realize that they had a commercial interest in C60-in-oil becoming a widely-used product. I did find it odd that someone would randomly do a toxicity study of C60 in olive oil, but ignored it.

The fact that they have a commercial interest makes me suspicious of the results in their paper. I am even more interested than ever in seeing independent confirmation (or denial).

[Turnbuckle]

Here is the world patent application for C60 in oil, from 2004--

http://worldwide.esp...OC&locale=en_EP

WHAT IS CLAIMED IS:
1. A stable biocompatible composition comprising: (a) a carrier selected from the group consisting of fats, oils, waxes and mixtures thereof; and (b) particles of at least one compound selected from the group consisting of water-insoluble fullerenes, wherein said particles are dispersed and/or dissolved in said carrier.

etc...

Inventors--MOUSSA, FATHI; GHARBI, NAJLA

And another patent application by them claiming C60 as a stabilizer for oil--

http://worldwide.esp...7001188A1&KC=A1

This is interesting. I didn't realize that they had a commercial interest in C60-in-oil becoming a widely-used product. I did find it odd that someone would randomly do a toxicity study of C60 in olive oil, but ignored it.

The fact that they have a commercial interest makes me suspicious of the results in their paper. I am even more interested than ever in seeing independent confirmation (or denial).

It looks to me that they abondoned the applications five years ago, as there was prior art.

[koala_muncher]

 

Well, Can you patent C60 in olive oil then? And have anyone done it?

An inventor could try. At present there is no such published patent application, but they aren't published until 18 months after filing.

 

 

Looks like C60 dissolved in Olive Oil has been patented by the authors of the rat study 

The prolongation of the lifespan of rats by repeated oral administration of [60] fullerene

 

the patent is just published (May 2014) here:

 

https://docs.google....20140140985.pdf

[Turnbuckle]

 

 

Well, Can you patent C60 in olive oil then? And have anyone done it?

An inventor could try. At present there is no such published patent application, but they aren't published until 18 months after filing.

 

 

Looks like C60 dissolved in Olive Oil has been patented by the authors of the rat study 

The prolongation of the lifespan of rats by repeated oral administration of [60] fullerene

 

the patent is just published (May 2014) here:

 

https://docs.google....20140140985.pdf

 

That's actually a patent application. It's very unlikely that claim 1 and its dependents will be allowed. All the examiner has to find is one fullerene dissolved in one similar oil as prior art and he will reject it. Claim 8 might be allowed since they showed convincing evidence of life extension. Method claims, however, are hard to enforce.

[niner]

Looks like C60 dissolved in Olive Oil has been patented by the authors of the rat study 
The prolongation of the lifespan of rats by repeated oral administration of %5B60%5D fullerene
 
the patent is just published (May 2014) here:
 
https://docs.google....20140140985.pdf

Are they pursuing this, or is it just something that the University's IP department made them do? There are problems with it, one of which is the published work of Franco Cataldo. There's a synthesis method in the application- wet ball milling. I wonder if any of the commercial producers are using it? I was puzzled that they listed paraffin and peanut butter(!) as enumerated examples of oils that could be used, but left out a ton of other reasonable possibilities.

I don't see this patent going anywhere.

[Turnbuckle]

Here's a non pdf version of the patent application from the US patent office, and another version from their EPO filing via Google.

 

Note that they bought their C60 from Term USA, which has a slightly purer product than SES for half the price.

 

Edited by Turnbuckle, 09 June 2014 - 12:43 PM.

[Turnbuckle]

Correction about Term USA pricing: the price for Term's C60 99.98% is about the same as SES's 99.9+% purified, and the price of Term's 99.98% sublimed is about the same as SES's 99.95+%, ultra pure Vacuum oven dried.

 

So not much difference. Term is a Russian company.

Edited by Turnbuckle, 09 June 2014 - 01:41 PM.