Slashdot Mirror
Ontario Ignores Gene Patent
Anonymous Coward writes "Well, for once my government the Ontario Tories have done something right. You see, there's this cancer test that involves a gene sequence patented in Utah. Thankfully, my goverment decided to
ignore the patent and help out those who need it. Ah the joys of living in such a liberated country." Different provinces have made different decisions about this particular patent.
Ah the joys of living in such a liberated country
You'll be less pleased when GWB names Canada as a new member of the Axis of Evil in his upcoming State of the Union address because of your "intellectual terrorism".
...they can ignore patents, but not my collection of unpaid parking tickets. ;)
"Yeah, well, Dracula called and he's coming over tonight for you and I said okay."
This is an important distinction.
If they patented the gene, it is already existing naturally, there is no reasonable infringement.
If they patented the procedure to detect the gene, they shoul get the benefit of their research (assuming it is a valid patent).
If they patented the gene as a method to predict cancer, then the arguement is quite murky. Finding cancer by looking for it is obvious. Finding cancer by looking for other unrelated factors is probaly a valid patent.
If this gene sequence is related to cancer (causative or a result of) then it is related to the having of cancer (like cough due to cold).
Maybe they just have a good patent lawyer.
Proud to be in a country that does this. Now if only Canada:
(1) Ignores all copyrights on MS Windows
(2) Leaves the ranks of GWB's warmonger party..
"Give orange me give eat orange me eat orange give me eat orange give me you." -Nim Chimpsky
Awesome.. i whole heartdly support them..
here's the real kicker..
"The tests cost about $1,100 each but Myriad, which also holds gene patents for screening of colon and prostate cancers, wants all tests done at its own laboratory at triple the cost."
Cost of healthcare is high enough.. and don't tell me they aren't making a dime when a test costs $1,100 each to begin with, not only that but cancer testing will remain IN CANADA, not in a foreign (not like the US is far away) country.
Sickens me to see my tax dollars wasted, but this is one good sign. With several relatives either gone because of cancer, or currently have cancer, prescreening is important and makes curing and treating cancer that much more possible.
- Happy Canadian flippin the bird at stupid US patents.
Genetic patents are patently ridiculous because they almost always involve discovering prior art and patenting it or the process used to observe it. Generally, genetic patents are not novel or new in any way. They are akin to patenting basic algorithms being applied to basic operations - for instance, building a b-tree to store and retrieve strings in one patent and integers in another.
Congrats to Ontario for seeing genetic patents for the farce they are. I could care less about the profits of a few would-be monopolists over the lives of even one or two people. Save the people, have compassion on the sick, and most importantly, don't value money over the lives of the poor. You could be poor one day.
$G
-- $G
First off, I am against large pharmaceutical companies profitting off of the sick and dying. But before heralding this as a victory for freedoms, the flipside also deserves some consideration. Like it or not, research into cures for diseases require money, period. This research is very expensive, and thus so are the resulting products. I can understand trying to cut excessive profiteering on new found medicines(or tests in this case) but if any nation can afford to pay some cash for the research that was done, surely we Canadians are one of those nations... Unless of course the price asked was in American dollars :)
The argument for enforcement of patents is not dissimilar from software or media piracy.
I disagree. Comanies always want more money. I think the scenario here is that its not really ok to copy music/video/etc (though we all do), but its also not ok, and much worse, to impose a fascist policy to stop it. If you can police it through normal means go ahead, but if you have to create all kinds of new laws that take away the rights of the citizens, then you have to find another way, or find a new business model.
In my opinion a society is in very big trouble the second it's citizens realize that the answer to the question "Am I going to die?" is "Do you have money?".
Whether or not you are right, Its always been that way to some degree and will continue to be. You could follow a communist philosophy (and I dont mean this as a flame) and try to make sure everyone gets equal treatment, but very likely (as we have seen) the total number of people (as well as total quality of help) goes down dramatically and still there will be those with more that will get better help.
As far as the sweatshop question is concerned, I seem to have a very different view of the situation. I see the problem is not the wages these people are paid, but the danger that they face with the machinery. All in all it is my belief that over all they are better off with the work that corperations bring to their countries. These people would otherwise need to work somewhere else and no doubt for less money. With companies seting up factories into these countries more money is being dumped into their economies. I think they must go through their industrial revolution as we went through ours as painful as it might be (it was for us also). Yes there are bad things that happen, but in the long run (I think)the country will be better off.
No I dont believe the companies are taking work to those countries for the good of the people, but I do believe that is the effect.
I dare say that we are very far from that original ideal.
Maybe you are right, but Its hard to see the big picture. I hold some faith in capitalism not because I think those who participate in it have lofty motives, but because the system expects them not to.
Im not here now... Im out KILLING pepperoni
i know what you're trying to say but it's not right. the patenting of genes occurs solely to prevent others (other comapanies, research institutions) from exploiting/developing cures through the exploitation/manipulation of that gene.
the fact is, discovering a potential gene/therapeutic target is only the first step in a long (10-15 years) and arduous road to a publically available cure/therapy, which is when the financial floodgates finally open (wide). the gene itself is worth nothing (in terms of $$$ value of course) until a therapy which exploits that gene or its gene product is discovered, and THAT'S where the money is. that and only that is what should (usually) be protectable/patentable.
GENETIC PATENTS ARE FUNDAMENTALLY WRONG because they prevent others from developing or even researching potential therapies right at the beginning of the discovery pipeline, which clearly and absolutely PREVENTS innovation/discovery and is AGAINST the public good. the innovation is the *therapy* that exploits the gene, not the gene itself. i can "discover" a (likely) new gene with some cheap and nasty perl and the publically available celera sequences, but what does the gene do? is it "important"? how does it work? does it cause, or correlate with, the incidence of some disease? how? etc etc. surely i shouldn't have the right to claim (patent) that gene as my "invention" until i've shown that it does something interesting and can demonstrate a method of its exploitation, right?
all in all, GENE PATENTS ARE MERELY SPECULATIVE LAND-GRABS, like someone bursting into a department store on the first morning of the post-christmas sales and then staking a claim on all the bargain bins whilst crying 'i got there first!'. the bargain bin should be open to everyone until someone picks something of value out of it, right?
in the same way that all web-savvy people decried the ridiculousness of amazon and others with their ludicrous patents, anyone worth their salt in molecular biology/biochemistry knows that GENE PATENTS ARE JUST WRONG WRONG WRONG.
- a card-carrying scientist
So a natural gene might look like this:
AxxxBxxxxCxxxxxxxxxD
The patented gene sequence would look like this:
ACBD
They've patented the gene sequence for dyslexia?