"
Team:Amplino/Solution/WhyNow
From 2012e.igem.org
(Difference between revisions)
| (2 intermediate revisions not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| + | ==Why Now== | ||
As we are using an existing technology (qPCR), one can wonder why it is not being used in endemic areas already. What has stopped or prevented previous attempts of taking qPCR outside of the lab? | As we are using an existing technology (qPCR), one can wonder why it is not being used in endemic areas already. What has stopped or prevented previous attempts of taking qPCR outside of the lab? | ||
A number of factors can be attributed to this: | A number of factors can be attributed to this: | ||
| - | + | * The cost of primer synthesis has descreased exponentially over the last decades. | |
| - | + | * The PCR patent, and many PCR related patents (such as fluorophores) have been or are about to expire. This allows the cost of consumables to drop significantly. | |
| - | + | * Rapid prototyping technology such as cheap electronics, 3D printing and lasercutting allows for lower development cost of new technology. | |
| + | |||
| + | All these cost factors are now making the business case of Point-Of-Care PCR diagnostics feasible. | ||
Latest revision as of 15:26, 21 October 2012
Why Now
As we are using an existing technology (qPCR), one can wonder why it is not being used in endemic areas already. What has stopped or prevented previous attempts of taking qPCR outside of the lab? A number of factors can be attributed to this:
- The cost of primer synthesis has descreased exponentially over the last decades.
- The PCR patent, and many PCR related patents (such as fluorophores) have been or are about to expire. This allows the cost of consumables to drop significantly.
- Rapid prototyping technology such as cheap electronics, 3D printing and lasercutting allows for lower development cost of new technology.
All these cost factors are now making the business case of Point-Of-Care PCR diagnostics feasible.
