Gene Patenting Genes Pros And Cons

Jonas Salk once said that things such as the sun and his polio vaccine should belong “to the people”. These “things” also include the genes that the Human Genome Project and all its collaborators have isolated thus far. The Human Genome Project’s mission is to sequence and map all of the genes that make up the human genome in order to improve medical treatment for genetic diseases and quite possibly eradicate them. However, companies who are involved in the isolation of individual genes are lobbying for the right to patent said genes. These companies are trying to establish a monopoly on something that is as much a creation of nature as is the human body. This should not be allowed because it would impede medical research, make treatment harder to obtain as well as expensive, and violate the code of medical ethics.

Gene patenting has become a popular issue after the Supreme Court involved Myriad Genetics, a Utah based company, in a case where the company was sued for claiming to patent genes BRCA1 and BRCA2. These genes are both believed to be involved in increasing hereditary risk for breast and ovarian cancer. The case has caused a debate between the society if patenting genes is ethical and the correct use of science. The law states that genes are products of nature, but does that make them patent eligible? There are many pros and cons for patenting genes but recently the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that human genes cannot be patented. Justice Clarence Thomas unanimously decided that "Myriad [Genetics] did not create anything,” and that they “found an important and useful gene, but separating that gene from its surrounding genetic material is not an act of invention."(Adam Iptak, New York Times). DNA sequences are a part o...

... middle of paper ...

...sing it to be unaffordable by much of the population in the United States. Having no competitors in the market, and being the only source of a certain gene, the company would hike the costs for the majority of the people. Moreover, this would cause for a greater number of deaths and cause newer forms of diseases to become more prevalent. Overall, gene patenting is protecting property, rather than inventions, and as gene patenting monopolizes a particular gene, the cost increases to a point where much of the population is unable to afford treatment.

In conclusion, claiming possession of someone's genes is like taking an ownership of a part of their body. Patenting genes is unethical and causes for a significant amount of the population to be unable to afford medical treatment. Genes are part of nature, and not man-made inventions which should be protected.