*new* Genetic mutations and autism
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/05/health/research/scientists-link-rare-gene-mutations-to-heightened-risk-of-autism.html?_r=1&nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20120405
Our guest last week led us into a discussion of gene patenting. . . here are related articles about the U.S. Supreme Court overruling the patenting of genes (the case involves those BRCA genes that our genetics counselor guest spoke of a few weeks ago):
* http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/27/business/high-court-orders-new-look-at-gene-patents.html?_r=1&nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20120327
* http://www.cfnews13.com/content/news/cfnews13/news/article.html/content/news/articles/ap/2012/03/26/High_court_throws_out_human_gene_patents/
I don't think genes should be patented. I agree with the scientists that said it would impede research. As we talked about a couple weeks ago, it was the secrecy involved with the patent that made research by other scientists virtually impossible. They would have to start from square one which seems silly since someone else is already on step fifty-four. Science takes many minds looking at the same thing to have one of those minds glance at it just the right way to get a breakthrough. I think that the competition will help with similar discoveries with other genes. Competition is what found the BRCA genes in the first place.
ReplyDeleteI also think it's ridiculous to patent genes. It seriously impedes the research and the amount of people that can be helped all over the country because of someone's selfishness. It is difficult for me to justify purposely withholding information that could be shared among the medical community that could not only affect people across the country, but around the world.
ReplyDeleteThe underlying issue should be the health and wellbeing of our fellow humans. It shouldn't be the amount of money that each research company is making, however that is the way it is. In the past reasearchers have withheld information that they found out through their research and in turn it takes much longer for the overall goal of their research to be accomplished because there are few who are allowed to see the results. If more brains were working on the same problems they would be solved faster and help people who are dying.
ReplyDeleteThe united states especially money is considered priority. I know alot of the medical equipment is expensive but how does that outweigh being human and ethical. There are people out there who need help but cannot afford this special care. Withholding information from the community is not ethically right because in order to succeed there needs to be other views toward that test. All of these views can help make the results more accurate and beneficial to the community.
ReplyDeleteI agree, i do not think information should be held because it is ethically wrong. All the facts and information should be expressed openly to the community and then more accurate decisions can be made.
ReplyDeleteI agree. I think that it is ethically wrong to withhold such scientific information from those that could benefit from it simply to earn money. I do believe, however, that expecting people to do scientific research purely for the benefit of helping others is unrealistic. If scientists did not get significant payments for their hard work, there would be significantly less incentive to do the research and motivation would be lost.
ReplyDeleteI agree. I think that it is wrong to withhold information that could help other people in order to make some money. I think that all of the information should be given to the community that way there could be an informed decision made about what should be done in the circumstance. I don't think that money should be the underlying goal of doing scientific research, but it should be how will it help the public.
ReplyDeleteI think that putting a patent on a gene is crazy. Not allowing other people to help those who need it is unfair. I think that people should have the chance to go anywhere and get the help that they need. I know money is a large factor, but patents shouldn't last as long as they do. Everyone should have a chance to better testing and without having the chance to even test does not advance anything. Yes money is important; however, peoples' lives are more important.
ReplyDeleteI think having a gene patent isn't a good thing because that basically says that we don't care about the health of a person but only how much a person can afford and ethically that is very wrong. This is definitely a business but I think that people's health and well being come before everything.
DeleteI also think the whole health care field is a big money chase but what isn’t in the country. People's lives are hanging in the balance and hospitals and clinics are all about the green. Although I am not opposed to having a gene patient and running those tests, because the more data we have the better chance we have to advancing the medical field as a whole. Risks are needed to achieve the cure for illnesses that hundreds die from daily.
Delete