A big concern
about gene patents is that they hinder genetic research — once one company has patented a gene, other researchers may fear infringing on that patent by conduct further research on it, the argument goes.
Not exact matches
Sure, much of the buzz these days is
about patenting genes and enforcing
patents on life - saving drugs in developing countries.
Discovering what mutations mean Researchers concerned
about patent infringement may abandon research on mutations within
patented genes, hindering progress to understand all of a mutation's effects.
Right or not,
about 20 percent of all human
genes already have been included in
patent claims.
Those opposed to
gene patents complain that no one without the permission of the
patent holder is allowed to freely work with, or even think
about using, this 20 percent.
What
about research on
patented genes?
Academic scientists are stewing
about a recently issued
patent that gives a private company the rights to CCR5, a human
gene that plays a key role in HIV infection.
Rifkin wants to provoke a debate
about what it means to be «human» and to undermine the legal basis for
patenting organisms — particularly those containing human
genes.
This week the biotech world was consumed with questions
about genes, and
patents, and
patents on
genes.