Is Your Body a Subsidiary of GlaxoSmithKline?

Skepticism about global warming and other issues notwithstanding, the author Michael Crichton seems right on the money when he challenges an apparent loophole in the law that permits the patenting of genes. (Believe it or not, a fifth of your genes are now privately owned!) In a disturbing op-ed piece in the New York Times, Crichton highlights the inherent problems of Patenting Life:

YOU, or someone you love, may die because of a gene patent that should never have been granted in the first place. Sound far-fetched? Unfortunately, it’s only too real.

Gene patents are now used to halt research, prevent medical testing and keep vital information from you and your doctor. Gene patents slow the pace of medical advance on deadly diseases. And they raise costs exorbitantly: a test for breast cancer that could be done for $1,000 now costs $3,000.

Why? Because the holder of the gene patent can charge whatever he wants, and does. Couldn’t somebody make a cheaper test? Sure, but the patent holder blocks any competitor’s test. He owns the gene. Nobody else can test for it. In fact, you can’t even donate your own breast cancer gene to another scientist without permission. The gene may exist in your body, but it’s now private property.

This bizarre situation has come to pass because of a mistake by an underfinanced and understaffed government agency. The United States Patent Office misinterpreted previous Supreme Court rulings and some years ago began — to the surprise of everyone, including scientists decoding the genome — to issue patents on genes.

Humans share mostly the same genes. The same genes are found in other animals as well. Our genetic makeup represents the common heritage of all life on earth. You can’t patent snow, eagles or gravity, and you shouldn’t be able to patent genes, either. Yet by now one-fifth of the genes in your body are privately owned.

The results have been disastrous. Ordinarily, we imagine patents promote innovation, but that’s because most patents are granted for human inventions. Genes aren’t human inventions, they are features of the natural world. As a result these patents can be used to block innovation, and hurt patient care. [full text]

For more on this issue, check out an earlier article in the New York Times by Denise Caruso entitled “Someone (Other Than You) May Own Your Genes.”

One thought on “Is Your Body a Subsidiary of GlaxoSmithKline?

Comments are closed.