Supreme Court: Can a corporation patent human genes?

[proverbialwisdom]

http://www.businessinsider.com/biggest-supreme-court-cases-of-2013-2012-12

These 5 Supreme Court Cases Could Change Americans' Lives This Year
Erin Fuchs | Jan. 2, 2013, 10:50 AM

In the summer of 2012, the average American paid more attention than ever to the nation's highest court. That's when the justices were deciding the fate of Obamacare, which impacts virtually every American.

But Americans should be keeping a close eye on the court in 2013, too.

Business Insider reached out to some of the nation's top Supreme Court experts to find out which cases will be the biggest game-changers. Here are the cases that could change your life.

1. Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics Inc. — The Supreme Court is going to decide whether biotech companies can patent genes.

The case turns on two Myriad Genetics patents for genes that show whether women have an increased chance of getting breast or ovarian cancer. Cancer groups say allowing companies to patent "products of nature" could interfere with research into potential cancer cures.

"The cures to many illnesses and conditions affecting human health lie within genetic research and how the court decides the fundamental question of patentability will have enormous implications for the future of that kind of research," top Supreme Court litigator Carter Phillips told BI in an email message.

<>

http://www.google.com/search?q=myriad+genetics+supreme+court+case&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en&client=safari
GOOGLE: myriad genetics supreme court case

http://thinkbeforeyoupink.org/

PROTEST ANNOUNCEMENT

On April 15th, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in a landmark case involving Myriad Genetics: can a corporation patent human genes — genes that we all have in our bodies? Our answer is: NO!

More: https://org2.democracyinaction.org/o/6098/p/salsa/event/common/public/?event_KEY=61609

http://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=/docketfiles/12-398.htm

[HiPointDem]

1. kr

[HiPointDem]

2. Let's look at the claims of Myriad's CEO:

Today, in a letter filled with non sequiturs and distortions, Myriad Genetics’ CEO Peter Meldrum, worried about whether his company will be able to maintain their monopoly on a test for which they charge $4000, responded. Let’s look at his claims.
He first claims that Myriad’s patents

“were essential to developing diagnostic tools that have been used by more than 1 million women to understand their hereditary risks of breast cancer and ovarian cancer.”

This claim is simply false. Myriad’s patents made no contribution at all (and certainly weren’t “essential”) to the diagnostic tools used to detect mutations. I know something about these tools, which I’ve been using in my own research for over 15 years. Furthermore, academic medical centers were offering their own diagnostic tests on the BRCA genes, at a lower cost than Myriad, until Myriad’s lawyers forced them to stop. So Myriad’s patents have increased costs to patients and, if anything, slowed down progress on making the tests faster and cheaper.

Second, Meldrum writes:

“Were these molecules derived in part from natural material? Sure. But that is true of many patents. Labs routinely turn naturally found molecules into innovative medicines and get patent protection.”

One’s jaw drops at this irrelevant non sequitur. Myriad has never created “innovative medicine” or any other sort of medicine. And the BRCA gene tests are not medicine: they are a diagnostic test that reads your DNA and tells you if you have harmful mutations in two specific genes. Myriad’s patents have nothing to do with medicines that treat breast and ovarian cancer – although it’s clear that Meldrum would like us to think otherwise.

Third, Meldrum claims:

“Our tests are also accessible; some 95 percent of patients get insurance coverage, and we offer the test for free to those who cannot afford it.”

This too is irrelevant, and also untrue. The fact that 95% of patients have insurance, even if true, has nothing to do with whether or not genes should be patented. And this merely hides the fact that Myriad’s test is outrageously overpriced, at $4000 per patient. The actual costs of testing for this gene should be far lower: we can now sequence an entire genome for $4000, and this test only looks at 2 genes out of more than 20,000....

The bottom line is that no one invented your genes, and no private company should be able to tell you that you can’t even read your own DNA. Today, you can get all of your DNA sequenced for less than the cost of the Myriad test. Using free software (developed by my lab), you can scan that DNA for mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2. And no company should be able to tell you not to.

Peter Meldrum’s letter reveals that he doesn’t care very much about the truth. Meldrum made $4.87 million in 2011 as CEO of Myriad, so it’s pretty clear what motivates him. Myriad’s use of its patents to charge exhorbitant prices to women at risk for breast and ovarian cancer does not demonstrate innovation. It just demonstrates greed.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevensalzberg/2013/04/13/myriad-genetics-ceo-owns-your-genes/