medpundit |
||
|
Tuesday, January 23, 2007If a researcher wants to study a gene, he or she must obtain a license or infringe. Some gene patent holders have stopped research on "their" genes by competitors. This is contrary to the purpose of the patent law - which is to stimulate innovation, not retard it. This is also why Americans must put up with inferior genetic tests to those available in other countries. In countries where the breast cancer genes and hemachromatosis genes were not patented, and thus were freely available for all researchers to analyze, more mutations have been discovered, allowing for better diagnostic testing. posted by Sydney on 1/23/2007 08:06:00 PM 4 comments 4 Comments:
Can gene patents be valid patent law? How about other natural phenomena, such as newly discovered species of medicinal plants? By 10:57 PM , atYeah, how can these people be patenting something that occurs naturally? By 12:11 AM , atDoes that mean it's a violation of patent law to have a baby? By 11:02 AM , at
American Law can be a real bitch. I don't know if patenting life is a great idea. On the other hand, maybe I should patent myself and everything I ever say! By 9:43 PM , at |
|