Minor edit, excerpt by Carolyn Bennett from Dr. Steven Salzberg's “Perils of Gene Patents”
“G
|
ene patents are antithetical to scientific progress
“Even if gene patents continue to be legal, scientists should
refuse to file them … : any scientist who files a gene patent
is, perhaps unknowingly, participating in a process that violates the basic
rules by which science operates.
![]() |
Bioinformaticist Steven Salzberg |
“In particular, scientists should disseminate their
findings and encourage others to push their work further. This principle applies
to all scientists, but particularly to those of us working in universities, nonprofits,
and other academic settings.”
Selfish secrecy hostile to inquiry

“S
|
cience that remains secret cannot contribute to scientific
progress and is for all intents worthless. A counterargument made by defenders
of patents is that inventions do not need to remain secret once the legal
application has been filed. This argument boils down to claiming that the delay
is not long enough to matter, which prompts the question ‘what benefits does
society gain from waiting, especially when the patent covers a human gene?’”
Obstructs requisite inquiry
“Gene patents create another, larger problem: they
discourage further work on those genes.

“T
|
his presents a bewildering ‘patent thicket’ to any
investigator wishing to pursue a new medical application of a gene. Working on
a patented gene can involve endless hours talking with lawyers, negotiating
licenses, and paying for those licenses. No scientist wants to spend time on such
extraneous activities; and, when given a choice, most will simply avoid
patented genes entirely, preferring instead to work on other genes.
“…Patenting genes undermines the scientific process — so much
so that one has to wonder why any scientist would do it. The answer is simple:
the profit motive.
Patent holders hope to enrich
themselves, especially if their patented gene is essential to the diagnosis or
treatment of a widespread human disease.
Thus, the more vital a gene is to
human health, the greater the selfish motivation to file a patent.

“Patenting human genes therefore constitutes an indirect
threat to human health. Unfortunately, some scientists have put their short-term
interest in profit ahead of their larger goals.”
Sources and notes
“The Perils of Gene Patents” (S.L. Salzberg), http://genomics.jhu.edu/papers/Perils-of-gene-patents-reprint-CPT2012.pdf,
Nature publishing group commentaries
S. L. (Steven L.) Salzberg
Bioinformaticist Steven Salzberg is a member of the
Institute of Genetic Medicine, with faculty posts in the Departments of
Medicine and Biostatistics at Johns Hopkins University. He has been Professor
of Medicine, Biostatistics, and Computer Science. At the University of Maryland
College Park, he was Director Horvitz Professor Center for Bioinformatics and
Computational Biology Department of Computer Science
http://arnetminer.org/person/s-l-salzberg-238006.html
Interviewed by Melissa Hendricks, http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/geneticmedicine/news/ScientistInterviews/steve_salzberg.html
“Novartis denied cancer drug patent in landmark Indian case ─
Supreme court ruling paves way for generic companies to make cheap copies of
Glivec in the developing world (Sarah Boseley, health editor), The Guardian,
Monday 1 April 2013 09.10 EDT. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/apr/01/novartis-denied-cancer-drug-patent-india
“U.S. supreme court to decide if companies can patent human
genes ─ Utah biotech firm to argue its patents on breast and ovarian cancer
genes are necessary to fund further research” (Karen McVeigh in New York), guardian.co.uk, Thursday 11
April 2013 13.07 EDT, http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2013/apr/11/supreme-court-gene-patents-cancer
“U.S. justices wary of wide human gene patent ruling ─ (Reuters)
- U.S. Supreme Court justices on Monday signaled reluctance to issue too broad
a ruling about patents on human genes, and some indicated they might seek a
compromise distinguishing between types of genetic material. The biotechnology industry has warned that an expansive
ruling against Myriad Genetics Inc could threaten billions of dollars of
investment (By Lawrence Hurley), WASHINGTON | Mon Apr 15, 2013 8:50pm BST, http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/04/15/us-usa-court-dna-idUKBRE93D08Q20130415?feedType=RSS&feedName=healthNews
_____________________________________
Bennett's books are available in New York State independent bookstores: Lift Bridge Bookshop: www.liftbridgebooks.com [Brockport, NY]; Sundance Books: http://www.sundancebooks.com/main.html [Geneseo, NY]; Mood Makers Books: www.moodmakersbooks.com [City of Rochester, NY]; Dog Ears Bookstore and Literary Arts Center: www.enlightenthedog.org/ [Buffalo, NY]; Burlingham Books – ‘Your Local Chapter’: http://burlinghambooks.com/ [Perry, NY 14530]; The Bookworm: http://www.eabookworm.com/ [East Aurora, NY] • See also: World Pulse: Global Issues through the eyes of Women: http://www.worldpulse.com/ http://www.worldpulse.com/pulsewire http://www.facebook.com/#!/bennetts2ndstudy
_____________________________________
No comments:
Post a Comment