Firm Claims Exclusive Right To Test Patented Genes

Tabercil writes: "Well, here's one for those who insist that human genes shouldn't be patented, as it seems to vindicate them. According to the Toronto Star, a U.S. firm (Myriad Genetics Laboratories) has patented two genes which lead to a greater likelihood of cancer. Now it's sending out cease and desist notices for other entities testing for the gene, insisting that only they can properly test for the gene."

What exacly is patented?

[maddogsparky]

Is it "a method for finding cancer by checking for the presence of gene a and b"? As far as I know, you can't patent human genes. That would be like someone trying to patent a new naturally occuring substance. Patents only apply to inventions and methods, not naturally occuring objects.

Re:What exactly is patented?

[peter hoffman]

Unfortunately, that is not so. You apparently can patent discoveries (as opposed to inventions) if you find a previously unknown use for them.

In this example, the two genes were discovered and then a new use for them (detecting cancer) was found. Hence, patentability.

Not only is this definition of patentability questionable from a public good perspective (which is the reason the patent system exists) but there is a land rush going on in that scientifically dubious uses for gene sequences are being claimed for the sole purpose of scaring other reasearchers away from that bit of genetic real estate.

Re:What exacly is patented?

[jesseraf]

I believe it's the test and not the gene. Genes themselves lack utility (a requirement for patentability, and why many of the NIH's early EST patents got rejected), but if you can find some kind of usefullness you can patent the test, procedure, etc for that particular gene.

http://www.delphion.com/details?pn=US06124104__
here's one of their patents

Triplicate

[hysterion]

See this [slashdot.org] and that [slashdot.org] earlier stories. The Libération article seems no longer online, but it outlined the Curie Institute's fight against that patent:

How will you express your opposition?

Quite simply by disputing the patent at the European Office. The Curie Institute will do it before October 10, cut off date. At the beginning, it seemed like a lost battle. But we lengthily studied the file, with lawyers. And, finally, we realized there are blatant faults in their armour. And we will object on three points. Firstly, the defect of innovation: before them, there were already tests of predisposition. Secondly, the defect of invention. Because, to win that race, they largely benefited from the results of public research, results which they did not even quote in the text of the patent. Thirdly, the insufficiency of description: the sequence which was used as a basis for the first patent is insufficient to carry out a test of predisposition.

Even more serious than the waste of money, is the complaint by researchers that Myriad, in effect, prevents them [postech.ac.kr] from improving the test so that it tracks a newly identified mutation. (The right to improve code, anyone?)

Re:could they they be taken to court for my cancer

[Teun]

And what about me having the CHANCE of this cancer and their greed is hampering discovery of treatment by others?

It pisses me off!

BioTech industry

[hackus]

Science is going to slow to a crawl in the 21st century in the US because of patents.

Look to China, Europe for new advances in scientific understanding in these areas.

Forget about the US, we are already WAY behind in cancer research, genetics research.

The primary cause is patents.

Meanwhile more and more people in this contry die of these diseases every day simply because the science can't move faster than what the lawyers say so.

-hack

Re:BioTech industry

[airuck]

Hogwash. Many (not all) multinational pharamceutical companies have their headquarters in Europe, but this is because they were founded in Europe. I challange you to name one, however, that does not maintain a biotech center in the USA. These companies are heavily dependant on the critical masses of biotech in North Carolina, San Francisco Bay Area, and San Diego. Biotech innovation in the USA keeps the development pipelines full around the world. The reason? US and European patent law protects capitol investment. Investment leads to innovation. Innovation leads to a products (cures). As new utilities are discovered and patented by companies (large and small), patents allow for collaboration between the small biotech ventures and the large pharma houses. I fail to see how the very risky business of biotech research could function without patent protection.

Re:BioTech industry

[jesseraf]

You got it backwards my friend.

At least regarding the research part. Patents don't inhibit academics to use these inventions for subsequent research. And it certainly doesn't not inhibit subsequent inventors from improving on someone else's invention.

R&D has deep roots in patents. Very few corporate R&D initiative would exist w/o the patent system.

And I agree w/ the previous poster regaring Euro Big Pharma having large centers in the US as well.

Province of Ontario, Canada to fight back

[Karlman]

The Province of Ontario.. as reported in the Toronto Globe and Mail (www.globeandmail.com) is ignoring the cease and desist letter they received from myriad. An interesting stat is the C$3000 ($2000 U.S.) per test cost difference between the hospital performing the test themself, and sending the DNA sample to Myriad as they insist on.