Michael Crichton on Why Gene Patents Are Bad

BayaWeaver writes "Michael Crichton, author of The Andromeda Strain and Jurassic Park has made a strong case against gene patents in an op-ed for the New York Times. Striking an emotional chord, he begins with 'You, or someone you love, may die because of a gene patent that should never have been granted in the first place. Sound far-fetched? Unfortunately, it's only too real.' From there, he moves on to use logic, statistics, and his way with words to make his point. Arguing against the high costs of gene therapies thanks to related patents, he eventually offers hope that one day legislation will de-incentivize the hoarding of scientific knowledge. As he points out: 'When SARS was spreading across the globe, medical researchers hesitated to study it — because of patent concerns. There is no clearer indication that gene patents block innovation, inhibit research and put us all at risk.'"

Comments

I Wish He Were Extinct

[Doc Ruby]

When you discredit yourself by talking pseudoscientific fiction as if it were facts on which to base politics then you should be ignored.

The books aren't bad, but anyone making decisions based on what's written in there is a fool who should themself be ignored.

Crichton's joining his famous voice against gene patents just makes it harder in the long run to fight it. It weakens the credibility, and attracts idiots who will believe anything a famous fool says who themselves become a difficult to defend flank in the battle.