This is one of probably the best known genomics tests performed today, to see if a woman has inherited a specific gene. The cost is not cheap at 
$3000.00 for the test and the ACLU states it is impairing further progress in research. On the other side of the coin, there has to be some incentive for the years of research and development. Intellectual Property today is being challenged in many areas of health care, in the drive to cut and hold down costs for one, and the other to allow additional companies to participating in manufacturing and developing.
So how do we determine what Intellectual Property is and how long can those patents run? This is big black hole for now, but even in the pharmaceutical end of things for example, Merck is doing battle with Teva, who is questioning their “patents” and “intellectual property”, why, because they can.
This is one big question and issue for a Congress to decide upon that are perhaps not the best versed in what the technology side represents, but are only looking at cutting costs and passing laws. The stakes are high, but when nobody can pay for them, what have we accomplished? If all incentives were to be removed too, we would definitely see a big decline in the biotech science area too, so what and where is the balance here. As science changes and it is determined that some proprietary resources are needed, some decision needs to arise. BD
NEW YORK (CNN) -- Patents on two human genes linked to breast and ovarian cancers are being challenged in court by the American Civil Liberties Union, which argues that patenting pure genes is unconstitutional and hinders research for a cancer cure.
The American Civil Liberties Union is suing Embedded video from CNN Video'>Myriad, arguing that patenting pure genes is unconstitutional and hinders research for a cancer cure.
Marsh said the company is aware the lawsuit has been filed but has not yet been served any legal documents.
Myriad's patents give it exclusive right to perform diagnostic tests on the genes, forcing other researchers to request permission from the company before they can take a look at BRCA1 and BRCA2, the ACLU said. The patents also give the company the rights to future mutations on the BRCA2 gene and the power to exclude others from providing genetics testing.
Caplan said patents are privileges, not "carved in stone." He said that the defendants may have identified the genes, but didn't actually work on them. So, the government could reverse the patents on the genes.
ACLU sues over patents on breast cancer genes - CNN.com
Related Reading:
0 comments :
Post a Comment