Do you think it's a good idea to allow enities to patent parts of the human genome?

Question

See:
http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/Human_Genome/elsi/patents.shtml
for more information. Frankly, it scares me...

Answer 1

In a word, NO.

Organisms are not owned, no matter the practical benefits to the research & development process. And the idea that infringement could occur upon patents that haven't been revealed is just crazy talk.

Answer 2

I peered over the site that you posted, and yes it does seem very scary...
I personally am opposed to such an idea. While I am all for free enterprise I do believe an unregulated market can also be a bad idea. In this case I am aware that there are bioengineered plants as well as animals that have been patented. Many of these "creations" have been enhanced with genes from another animal to artificially select for a certain desirable trait in laboratory settings. So there is a precedent for it. But I don't see it as an invention, as the argument stands. Maybe a weak argument here, but I can take the engine out of a Chevy and put it into a Ford. Doesn't make it a new vehicle, nor can I patent it as something of my own invention, at least to my knowledge. I simply took some one else's idea (creation/invention?) and modified it to better fit my needs/tastes/whims.
But I digress...in closing, in this country we have laws against ownership of human beings. I believe those same laws should extend as well to the ownership of "rights to" humans either in part or in whole. As a medical professional, I shudder to think of a future in which bioengineered transplant organs, or genetic cures for disease may be patented to one (potentially unethical) corporation.

Answer 3

Absolutly not. Though companies and individuals have done greats works, I don't believe that anyone should be able to patent parts of the human genome. We are what we are. You can't claim that you created or achieved something that nobody else has. We all carry the genes of the genome and to claim that you have the right to take credit for theses and hold the right to give your patent rights to whom you want isn't right. I do believe you should get payed for your findings, but not to the point that you take such a great descovery and ruin it with this idea of a patent.

Answer 4

according to the US patent, anything that is able to be protected is "DNA products ...[that] have been isolated, purified, or modified to produce a unique form not found in nature. " so they are not putting a patent on the human genome, but rather a unique, never before seen strand of nucleotides that would other wise never have been strung together. i think companies should be rewarded if this strand is able to benifit people so that they can contiue to develope similar strands. but in the end, it still isnt the human genome they have patented, just a string of chemicals they created and the techniques to do so, such as DuPonts kevlar, teflon, etc.

Answer 5

NO nonononono. And in case you did not hear it no. Patenting part of the human genome is like me saying I patent part of your small intestine. I can see naming a sequence after the first scientist or team to work it out, but patenting? NO

Answer 6

No