Genes are “products of nature” which are not legally allowed to be patented. Additionally, giving monopoly to a company on a human gene is immoral. Thus go the arguments of those like American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and others who have filed suits against gene patenting.
A U.S. District Court ruled in favor of ACLU, and the company concerned, Myriad Pharmaceuticals, have gone in appeal.
The basic argument of gene patenting advocates is that developing biotech drugs is a highly expensive process, and that companies will have an incentive to do this and develop lifesaving diagnostics and therapies only if their discoveries are protected as intellectual property. The Patent Office has been granting patents on genes on the ground that once these are isolated from their natural environment in the body, they cease to be products of nature.
Other cases in courts include patentability of business methods, such as methods of analysis, data interpretation, and performing certain tasks including the administering of diagnostic tests and therapeutics.
Personalized medicine is a new development related to genes. A person’s genetic makeup can determine which treatments will be most effective for that person, as identified through genetic diagnostic tests. Companies have been developing such tests in the laboratory and these laboratory-developed tests (LDTs) are now being increasingly overseen by the Food and Drug Administration to assess the risks involved.
Read the article at TechJournal South.
Tags: biotechnology, gene patenting, genetic diagnostic test, personalized medicine
