Can Corporations Own Your DNA?

Patients, ACLU Sue Over Gene Patents; Companies Say Gene Patents Help Advance Research

(CBS)  It's hard to believe, but private companies hold the patent rights to some of the genes in your body. The companies say the patents help them develop new treatments for serious diseases. But this week, a group of cancer patients and the American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit claiming the patents put them in danger, reports CBS News correspondent Wyatt Andrews

After facing and surviving breast cancer, Genae Gerard simply had to know more. A widely available genetic test - known as the BRAC test - revealed that she carried the gene BRCA 2, which also put her at higher risk for ovarian cancer.

When she tried to look for an alternate test for a second opinion, she learned no that other tests are permitted.

"You cannot get a second opinion on the BRAC testing because there's only one company that does it," Gerard said. "That's the problem."

That one company, Utah-based Myriad, doesn't just own the test. It was able to patent the genes BRCA1 and BRCA2 - the genes most often linked to breast and ovarian cancer. And owning the patent essentially means that Myriad owns the genes themselves.

"Common sense should tell everybody that it's wrong to allow a private company to own a body part," ACLU attorney Chris Hansen said.

In what could be a landmark lawsuit, the ACLU is challenging the private ownership of body parts.

Today an estimated 20 percent of all human genes have been patented, including some linked to Alzheimer's disease and cystic fibrosis, and the lawsuit argues that private ownership is restricting - not helping - the invention of new therapies.

"The effect of this gene patent has been to stifle medical treatment and medical research," Hansen said.

In a statement to CBS News, Myriad argues the opposite, saying that the patent system that protects genetic inventions helps "a large number of lifesaving pharmaceutical and diagnostic products."

Legally, this could be a free-for-all.

While the courts and Congress are inclined to protect genuine invention, genes exist naturally in the body. And if you can't patent natural products like water, the argument goes, how can you patent DNA?

[ayatoldya]

This is blatantly wrong. So wrong that even a half-witted attorney could argue the invalidity of these gene patents. After all, these gene sequences are open source and at no single moment in time did these companies have sole or full control over them.

Patents are often contested and often a patent is removed. In the case of a genome of a living creature, the patent is a ruse, a smoke screen; just waiting for it to be knocked down in court.

This type of patent is akin to putting a patent on a satellite picture of San Francisco.

[scyouth]

The late Michael Chrichton wrote a book on this very same subject - "Next." As all of his books this one is incredibly well researched and believable - excellent reading.

In my view, while the company can patent the test and whatever drugs they develop for treatment, they should NOT be able to patent the genes themselves. It would be like a company with an anti-baldness drug patenting hair.

[ToolMangler1]

Upon birth, the child should be granted a trademark, copyright and a patent - and instead of a birth certificate, incorporation. Everyone would be listed online in the Business to Business pages.
Posted by caldwellptr at 5:17 PM : May 14, 2009



I agree 1000%

[inachu1]

One day I can envision a company refusing a person to quit working there when they say they can't quit ," You are company property. We own all rights to your DNA." Company guards prevent you from leaving and your office phone has been disabled and your cell phone removed from your possesion.

The day this happens is the day the CEO's of that company need their children taken away from them and remove all parental rights and visitations and take away their passports and put them under house arrest for the rest of their lives with no TV and no internet connection.

[caldwellptr]

Upon birth, the child should be granted a trademark, copyright and a patent - and instead of a birth certificate, incorporation. Everyone would be listed online in the Business to Business pages.

[mcontreras4]

I don't believe that this patent will be upheld. One website concerning patentable items specifically says "You also can't patent a natural product, even if it takes a lot of work to discover it, as might be the case with a rare medicinal herb." If the company only discovered the genes and did not do anything to create a new product, it should not be patented.

[inesje88]

Please watch "The Corporation", part 16. In 1987 the US Patent Office ruled that you can patent anything except a full human being. The entire series is interesting but part 16 can't be missed.

[DreamRaker]

I can understand why many are concerned with the idea of patenting genetic information. Keep in mind, however, that it costs tens of millions of dollars to do the research leading to the discovery of defective genes that cause many horrific diseases. If the new knowledge cannot be protected in some manner, then an unscrupulous foreign company can pirate that knowledge for their own financial gain without the huge investment in research that was required for the discovery. So, if there is no way to protect the initial investment in R&D, there is no incentive to do the work in the first place, and all of humanity suffers. Research does not come for free. It requires the dedicated efforts of many highly skilled professionals, who also have bills to pay (maybe including a college loan) and families to raise.

Traditionally, the international patent system has been used to protect new knowledge for a certain length of time, usually 17-20 years, after which that knowledge goes into the public domain and is then free for use by all. If not that system, then what does the CLU and others suggest?

[paddyhayes]

I'm going to get a patent on shyte.

Every time anyone takes a crap, I'm charging a buck and half for patent infringement.

[x1947lr]

Let us be free! Take your patent and stuff it! Leave people alone, allow them their privacy whether they are ill or not. it's none of your business Shove it up your collective *****

This is my opinion and I am entitled to it. Your opinion is diffirent and you are entiitled to it as well . . . but your opinion is an intelligence abomination. Intelligence can be good but this kind of intelligence is an insult to human beings everywhere.
What happens when you discover faulty genes amongs your own? Do you kill them off to prevent spreading the "disease"? Let's create a perfect socieiety like Hiltler wanted to do.
Take you knowledge and put it someplace dark and smelly.

Roger

[paddyhayes]

The big corporations already have us by the b*lls. If they give a little squeeze they can get all the DNA they want.

[whitemale08]

the disgusting behaviour of these financial oligarchs is simply appalling.

they might as well say that they own every type of plant life since they don't know everyone that can be used for medicine.

Same thing with Manzanto, nobody died and made them god in order to control every heir loom seed in the world, wiping out the original seeds in Iraq to have them replaced with genetic modified garbage so they can control their population.

This is evil evil stuff and it must be STOPPED IMEDIATELY AND SHUT DOWN MANZANTO

[mike18881]

If they want pay me for my DNA, (a very larg sum by the way), I might consider selling. Them thinking that they can just take it is absurd.