Member of the Month

PartyBullshiit
March, 2024

Online

Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!

Who do your genes belong to?

profile picture
HWW
Posts: 3084 - Karma: 3,436
I just read an interesting article about patenting of genes, have a look and discuss.
___

Apparently now around 40% of the human genome is patented, meaning that using certain genes, and experimenting with their mutations for future research (such as finding cures for cancer & other diseases) could become difficult for independent researchers.

US company Myriad Genetics claims that the genes they have isolated in order to perform tests looking into gene-related illnesses are products of human ingenuity, giving them the right to patent these gene sequences.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) argues that genes are products of nature and should therefore not be subject to patenting under US laws.

"The patent system was designed to encourage innovation, not stifle scientific research and the free exchange of ideas, which is what these patents do," says ACLU's lawyer Christopher Hansen. His co-counsel stated that patenting genes would be "morally offensive."

A court ruling is expected in June, and may have significant consequences for the multi-billion pharmaceuticals industry in the US.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-22157410
___

Due to gene recombination during reproduction, every one of us has our own genome. If someone else sequenced your genome and tried to use it to either create a new organism or just for some type of research, would you be offended? Do you think that your genome belongs to you personally, or to mother nature herself?

I feel this topic is becoming very important as technology increasingly moves towards the area of human development and biological capabilities, where computing is combined with living elements.
Jun 14 2013 4:32PM
10 7
profile picture
Holte
Posts: 10730 - Karma: 7,744
Either way, you shouldn't be able to patent a discovery. Nothing NEW is being created, it's just being documented.
Jun 14 2013 4:34PM
0 0
profile picture
bo0b
Posts: 2964 - Karma: 994
Levi's.
Jun 14 2013 4:35PM
2 1
profile picture
Mr.Sloth
Posts: 5091 - Karma: 13,469
Fun fact, they ruled against it
Jun 14 2013 4:36PM
2 0
profile picture
Huck_Norris
Posts: 11487 - Karma: 18,627
Yay for fun!
Jun 14 2013 4:38PM
2 1
profile picture
*TURBONERD*
Posts: 15078 - Karma: 9,136
While still leaving the possibility of patenting engineered genes - something that's actually been created, not discovered. A pretty unsurprising ruling, really.
Jun 14 2013 4:42PM
0 0
profile picture
ILLinoisance
Posts: 3527 - Karma: 5,398
Thanks Obama!
Jun 14 2013 4:54PM
1 1
profile picture
grapejuice3000+
Posts: 2132 - Karma: 1,985
f u i was gonna say this
Jun 14 2013 4:57PM
0 2
profile picture
Dingo69
Posts: 1330 - Karma: -171
Fuck obama
Jun 14 2013 5:08PM
1 1
profile picture
a_pla5tic_bag
Posts: 9210 - Karma: 5,357
No that makes perfect sense. 'natural' genes shouldn't be able to be patented. all that does is keep people from being able to do research affecting and/or involving those genes. If you were able to create a gene that creates a functioning product that's useful then that's 1. a product of human intuition and 2. pretty astounding because writing a gene from scratch to create a functioning product (not necessarily protein) is quite difficult. Under that though, I would not count a fusion protein of something like a DNA binding domain and something else for say, a yeast two hybrid assay. While the yeast two hybrid assay is useful and indeed a product of human ingenuity, it's rearranging things that already exist from nature. Plus i'm sure you can buy a patented yeast system anyway, or at least the plasmids that code for the fusion proteins.

i'm not sure about the cDNA part. cDNA is technically naturally occurring because of reverse transcriptase.

"Genes and the information they encode are not patent eligible... simply because they have been isolated from the surrounding genetic material" is what one of the justices said and thats true for sure.


Jun 14 2013 5:27PM
0 0
profile picture
a_pla5tic_bag
Posts: 9210 - Karma: 5,357
ok i got it now. you can patent a yeast two hybrid system or one like it but you can't patent the DNA binding domain or GFP since they're naturally occurring. well, that is what the ruling says isn't it lol.
Jun 14 2013 5:38PM
0 0
profile picture
bo0b
Posts: 2964 - Karma: 994
Anything I can do to stop grapejuice300+ from posting is not just a personal accomplishment, but also a public service to Newschoolers as a whole.
Jun 14 2013 7:50PM
1 1
profile picture
a_pla5tic_bag
Posts: 9210 - Karma: 5,357
to clarify more, an engineered gene to me would mean to create a new functioning something. Proteins are easy to talk about as products of genes so i'll say a new protein. I believe there's only 2000 folds known or so and there's upward of 20000 proteins. TO engineer a new, stable, non prion reating fold which serves a function would certainly take a quantum computer i'd think. TO my knowledge, no entirely synthetic proteins have been put to use to perform a function in living things. I mean if someone knows otherwise, please link me cause that's cool as fuck.
Jun 14 2013 8:05PM
0 0
profile picture
*TURBONERD*
Posts: 15078 - Karma: 9,136
I'm agreeing with you haha
Jun 14 2013 8:05PM
0 0
profile picture
gregorio
Posts: 2372 - Karma: 151
Yeah it's really not a surprise that the genes themselves cannot be patented because nothing in nature can be patented, that's why pharmaceutical companies spend so much money developing derivatives of natural compounds.

And even though the genes aren't patentable the cDNA is and so is the extraction process of the DNA
Jun 14 2013 8:13PM
0 0
profile picture
Stickity
Posts: 7750 - Karma: 769
i do

#yolo
Jun 14 2013 10:50PM
0 0
profile picture
a_pla5tic_bag
Posts: 9210 - Karma: 5,357
i know, i more or less typed that up now so i could collect my thoughts for when this inevitably becomes an issue for me in the future.
Jun 14 2013 11:04PM
0 0
profile picture
B.Aussie
Posts: 5851 - Karma: 4,522
Thank fuck they didn't allowed them to get patented.
Jun 15 2013 5:04AM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-4)