Human Gene Patenting: Yes, Companies Can Own Your DNA. - Polidicks

The way I see it, if this goes on, many companies will use this as a guise for human slavery by illegally planting their edited gene sequences into people, therefore making those people "Property" of the patent. Tough shit, huh? [editline]28th December 2012[/editline] [IMG]http://ia.media-imdb.com/images/M/MV5BMTAwNjk0NjM1ODReQTJeQWpwZ15BbWU3MDc1NjIxMzM@._V1._SY317_.jpg[/IMG]

[quote]However, the case went to appeal — and Myriad won its patents back. A three-judge panel decided that "isolated DNA" was somehow different than "naturally occurring" DNA — and that this distinction could allow fragments of human genes to be patented. This decision prompted geneticist S.L. Salzberg to write a scathing commentary in Nature in which he pointed out what he saw as an absurdity: "By this argument, a blood sample or even an amputated limb is not 'naturally occurring' and is therefore patentable." Genes, said Salzberg, are not inventions. "This simple fact, which no serious scientist would dispute, should be enough to rule them out as the subject of patents," he wrote. But by virtue of their decision, the judges had declared human DNA fragments to be something new, and hence, an invention.[/quote] The stupidity literally makes me fucking angry. Some idiots in a court somewhere with no knowledge in the subject what so ever gets to decide that a company can patent a gene belonging to every living woman, aka 3.5 billion people on this planet. This shit needs to be revised, and fucking fast before these companies get a strangle hold on politicians and courts.

[QUOTE=Flubadoo;39002024][img]http://ncowie.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/gattaca-inspirational-movie.jpg[/img] [editline]28th December 2012[/editline] we inch closer and closer to it every day[/QUOTE] We were shown this in high school biology and I'm so glad that they did.

Fuck it, I'm patenting myself before anyone patents me.

This is one step closer to have Concerns being more powerful than governments.

[QUOTE=CommieTurtle;39005377]Companies have been able to patent genes for years. Why is this suddenly news?[/QUOTE] It's been news for a long time, but the average news outlet won't bother as the astounding public apathy means that they'll happily ignore it. You'll occasionally get a few articles on FP about Monsanto seeds and the like, but never as many as there should be. If you look back a few months, I believe there's one about farmers killing themselves with Monsanto pesticide due to the fact Monsanto increased the price severalfold for no real reason other than money.

[QUOTE=Milkdairy;39007168]The way I see it, if this goes on, many companies will use this as a guise for human slavery by illegally planting their edited gene sequences into people, therefore making those people "Property" of the patent. Tough shit, huh? [editline]28th December 2012[/editline] [IMG]http://ia.media-imdb.com/images/M/MV5BMTAwNjk0NjM1ODReQTJeQWpwZ15BbWU3MDc1NjIxMzM@._V1._SY317_.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE] This isn't Star Trek. You can't just implant DNA into someone, dumbass.

[QUOTE=Wealth + Taste;39007787]This isn't Star Trek. You can't just implant DNA into someone, dumbass.[/QUOTE] Viruses hijack cells, take over them and use them to produce viral DNA / RNA (depends on virus), and we occasionally take advantage of that in gene therapy, which can be used to implant working bits of DNA into people, though the effects are short lived. It's sometimes used to help with cystic fibrosis, though what he is saying is way in the future and an exaggeration.

You know, if you read into the subject, there's a lot more to it beyond the knee-jerk 'hurr why they patent my genes' reactions. These companies put a lot of time and money into extremely advanced genetic research, and produce novel methods of finding and using existing genes. That's what's being patented, not the genes themselves. As it says in the article: [quote]Specifically, a gene patent can be granted for a claim on a nucleic acid, or for a method of diagnosing a genetic condition. Claims can be made over a DNA or RNA sequence, or a method of identifying the existence of a DNA or RNA sequence in an individual.[/quote] This is cutting-edge research and these companies need some way to secure control over their work, otherwise it's impossible to recoup the investment. It's unfortunate that women are forced to pay costly fees to search for a gene related to cancer, but without the ability to charge for the results the company would have never conducted the research in the first place. Just saying, look into it a bit before you leap to conclusions. It's not all black and white. Some of the patents these companies have gotten away with are ridiculous, but a fair number are legitimate claims to novel research.