It was a day when the well-honed soundbites from President Clinton and Mr Tony Blair, designed for news headlines, were outshone by the deeply-felt excitement, enthusiasm, pride and wonderment of scientists which surfaced across the globe - these are the kind of people usually noted for reservation, qualification, introversion and poor communication.
The reaction was soon infecting much of humankind for it was a great acknowledgment that scientists everywhere - not just as Isaac Newton had claimed in 1675 - could see a lot further "by standing on the shoulders of giants".
Working drafts of the entire human genome, the codes that dictate life, had been decoded though there was the "small" issue of working out what they mean exactly - and like any major scientific discovery there was potential for a downside in the form of eugenics and genetic discrimination.
Two of the giants in this classic race in pursuit of scientific breakthrough fit perfectly into a "good boy versus bad boy" paradigm and, appropriately for the media, they couldn't be more different. But their respective work and viewpoints reflect a tension in the world of scientific endeavour, and one that is going to become more taut, notwithstanding this week's peace pact.
In one corner is Dr John Sulston (57), the British scientist responsible for mapping a third of the genome, armed with £210 million from the Wellcome Trust medical charity; a key player within the international Human Genome Project (HGP). According to the Guardian, this bearded Oxfam supporter likes the "delights of growing runner beans and driving a second-hand family car", while Who's Who lists his pastimes as "gardening, walking, avoiding people".
He made headlines for his involvement in publishing the gene map of the nematode, a tiny worm, in 1990. With typical understatement, he describes DNA-sequencing as "solid middle of the road science". When the trust joined the HGP venture in 1992, Dr Sulston was appointed to the Sanger Centre in Cambridge, named after the scientist who devised the technique used by both sides to sequence genes.
In the opposite corner is the brilliant American biochemist and ardent capitalist Dr Craig Venter (54) of Celera Genomics, who gets around in a Lear jet, conducts business from his 84 foot yacht, The Sorcerer, and can raise $1 billion on the New York Stock Exchange in a day - his critics describe him as Darth Venter, evil monopolist. However, the once surfing drop-out, whose evaluation of life - especially time - was turned on its head by Vietnam War experience, seems to thrive on such odium.
This week's events suggest Dr Sulston won by ensuring the research was publicly available, courtesy of hundreds of scientists in six countries. But it may not always be this way. Corporations, and maybe even universities, are likely to seek financial rewards for big investment in research, particularly the hugely expensive business of genomics - the HGP will cost some $3 billion.
Despite much scepticism, Dr Venter did make a jump on genome rivals by realising late in the 10-year race he could target active gene sites, and not the entire DNA chain as cells already use these parts naturally. He brought about a conclusion sooner than anticipated. His company may not have existed three years ago, but it soon became obvious his DNA sequencing technology had speed on its side. But with political pressure and realisation that commercialisation would not be as simple as selling potatoes, Dr Venter agreed to a joint announcement; a staged-managed draw, after many months of recrimination. Jointly making the announcement with President Clinton at his flank will in time bring its rewards. (A "bird's eye" view of working drafts of both camps is due to be published by the journal Science.)
Dr Sulston agrees this battle was won by the HGP side but warns the future cannot be predicted. "Global capitalism is raping the earth, it's raping us. If it gets complete control of the human genome, that is very bad news indeed. That is something we should fight against," he declared before the announcement.
At a landmark press conference in London, he added: "I for one didn't want my genetic information to be under the control of any one entity, any one corporation. We had to fight, sadly. On the other hand I was proud to do it."
The bottom line is "our basic information, our `software' should be free and open for everyone to play with, to compete with, to try and make products". He told The Irish Times he believes a strong sense of research for all, which inspired HGP teams and was reflected in nightly downloading of vast amounts of sequencing data onto the Sanger Centre website, won out - this was time-coded to ensure others (such as Dr Venter) could not subsequently claim patenting priority.
He detects change in the Celera attitude. Talk about patents has been replaced by reference to "publication and free release". But, clearly, it will not be free. Academics were likely to benefit from it, but there would be restrictions for others - a position at variance with the HGP side, and one that may preclude publication by a journal like Science.
And so the point in human history had been reached "where for the first time we are going to hold in our hands the set of instructions to make a human being". Dr Sulston says knowledge of the human genome will have a far reaching cultural effect on mankind, beyond its many practical uses.
Dr Sulston is pleased their work has been seen in such a positive light, in contrast to hysteria surrounding GM foods. Yet he knows people have concerns about possible dangers. He welcomes their sense "it is something we should be worried about" because this had to be an important part of considering its implications. It was not an issue to be left to experts, and he was delighted by Mr Blair making a distinction between "discovery and using the discovery". He feels strongly the Republic, as an important EU member, must make sure Europe "accelerates and keeps up with the US and Japan" in this area of research. The level of EU investment is not large compared to the US in terms of public and privately-funded research. And it should target basic genomics and applications of the information it generates in biotechnology, and bioinformatics.
The wider message of the human genome pointed to two profound truths - the remarkable similarities between people, and with other life forms, and the wonderful differences between individuals. "My way of looking at it is that we should take both morals from it. We should certainly regard ourselves as similar and take responsibility for one another in that way, but we also have to respect our differences."
The current human genome information marks just the "end of the beginning", Dr Sulston notes. Detailed work will continue for at least the next two years filling in knowledge gaps to produce a "gold standard" reference sequence.
It is already one of those achievements of the human spirit that makes us "proud to be human" (as described by the master of interpreting science Richard Dawkins). But then it will shine out across the world with Bach's music; Shakespeare's sonnets and the Apollo Space Programme, as a testimony to the human capacity to inspire and do good for fellow humans.
