What are the implications of gene patenting?

Authors Avatar

Biology                Viyaasan Mahalingasivam – L6AJWH

What are the implications of gene patenting?

In 1997, the US Patent Office agreed to allow patenting of gene strands with no known biological function if they were likely to have industrial use.  The result has been that big academic labs and companies have been sequencing and patenting sequences in order to secure private investment.1  The topic has been surrounded by a large amount of controversy and there are numerous sides to the arguments.  Biotechnology firms claim that if they couldn't patent genes it wouldn't be worth their while developing life-saving drugs and therapies, while many scientists, religious believers, humanists and environmental campaigners find loathsome the concept of private, for-profit corporations staking claims to what is literally a human birthright.2

        A claimed advantage of gene patenting is that it encourages the “inventor” to publish details of their discoveries, allowing academic scientists to study it.  However, once one of these researchers uses developments based on the original patent by perhaps forming a partnership with a drugs firm or charging patients at cost for a genetic test, the holder of the patent has the right to stop them or oblige them to pay a licence fee.2  The extent of costs may therefore hinder any progress.

It is also claimed that without gene patenting, investment in genetic research would be discouraged.  However, the cost of identifying the function of a gene is a fraction of the cost of turning that gene into something useful, for example a drug.  There is an argument the pharmaceutical industry, which has to come up with the bulk of the money would do better if firms were able to work freely with any genes and focused on patenting drugs instead.  However, gene patent ownership is such an important part of biotechnology companies stock market valuation that to threaten the concept of banning gene patenting would cause a market upheaval.2

Join now!

Members of the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia and the Stanford University in Palo Alto and their colleagues looked at the case of two patented mutations associated with hereditary haemochromatosis, a disease where a person absorbs too much iron from food. In the US, about one person in 200 develops the disease, which can be fatal, and about one in 10 is a carrier. It is easily treatable by regular bloodletting.  The discovery of the gene mutations was reported in 1996 and many US labs began testing for the condition. A patent was awarded two years later and SmithKline Beecham ...

This is a preview of the whole essay