Genes should not be patentable

The Supreme Court will decide whether human genes can be patented.

If the Supremes allow genes to be patented, that will not mean that the patent holder actually own bits of you. But it would mean that the company would possess the exclusive right to commercially benefitfrom the use of the patented genes in the manufacture and testing of products during the term of the patent. If others wanted to use the same gene in research or manufacture, they would have to pay a licensing fee.

Here’s the problem: A patent is supposed to protect a human invention. A gene — even if isolated — is not a human invention. It occurs naturally. In that sense, I don’t see the controversy. Genes should not be patentable.

View the original article here: Supremes to decide whether others can own your genes

Outbreak
Outbreak Daily Digest
Biotech Facts & Fallacies
Talking Biotech
Genetics Unzipped
Infographic: What are mRNA COVID-19 vaccines and how do they work?

Infographic: What are mRNA COVID-19 vaccines and how do they work?

As of 1 December 2020, thirteen vaccines have reached the final stage of testing: where they are being given to ...
favicon

Environmental Working Group: EWG challenges safety of GMOs, food pesticide residues

Known by some as the "Environmental Worrying Group," EWG lobbies ...
m hansen

Michael Hansen: Architect of Consumers Union ongoing anti-GMO campaign

Michael K. Hansen (born 1956) is thought by critics to be ...
News on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.
glp menu logo outlined

Newsletter Subscription

Optional. Mail on special occasions.
Send this to a friend