SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
A DNA double helix is seen in an undated artist's illustration released by the National Human Genome Research Institute to Reuters on May 15, 2012.
(Reuters/National Human Genome Research Institute/Handout)
Victory for Patients: SCOTUS Rules Against Gene Patents
Jun 13, 2013
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously Thursday that human genes cannot be patented, a victory for "patient care and medical innovation," that will allow greater access to genetic testing and more affordable treatment for cancer patients, the American Civil Liberties Union said today.
The court decision invalidated patents on two genes associated with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer in response to a lawsuit filed by the ACLU and the Public Patent Foundation (PUBPAT) on behalf of women's health groups and thousands of researchers, health professionals and patients.
The case concerned patents on human genes held by Myriad Genetics, a Utah based corporation, on human genes that are tied to the risk of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer--an issue that received public attention in May when actress Angelina Jolie revealed she had a preventive double mastectomy. The news spawned debate over the procedure that is out of reach for most patients because of the extremely high costs related to Myriad's monopoly over the genes.
Myriad's patents had allowed them to set the terms and cost of testing the genes and "made it difficult for women to access alternate tests or get a comprehensive second opinion about their results," the ACLU explains.
ACLU continues:
The patents allowed a Utah company, Myriad Genetics, to control access to the genes, known as BRCA1 and BRCA2, thereby giving them the right to limit others from doing research or diagnostic testing of the genes, which can be crucial for individuals making important medical decisions.
"Today, the court struck down a major barrier to patient care and medical innovation," said Sandra Park, senior staff attorney with the ACLU Women's Rights Project. "Myriad did not invent the BRCA genes and should not control them. Because of this ruling, patients will have greater access to genetic testing and scientists can engage in research on these genes without fear of being sued."
The decision is a major shift in patent law pertaining to human biology and declares that all the patents on human genes are invalid.
Justice Clarence Thomas, who wrote the court's decision, stated:
"We hold that a naturally occurring DNA segment is a product of nature and not patent eligible merely because it has been isolated."
"The court rightfully found that patents cannot be awarded for something so fundamental to nature as DNA," said Daniel B. Ravicher, executive director of PUBPAT and co-counsel in the lawsuit.
"I'm relieved that no other women will have to go through what I went through," said Lisbeth Ceriani, a breast cancer survivor and plaintiff in the case, who was faced with having to pay over $4,000 for Myriad's testing. "I'm so glad that the Supreme Court agrees that women deserve full access to vital information from their own bodies."
The court did, however, rule that "synthetically produced genetic material" could be patented as opposed to genes extracted from the human body, known as isolated DNA.
_____________________
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Jacob Chamberlain
Jacob Chamberlain is a former staff writer for Common Dreams. His website is www.jacobpchamberlain.com.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously Thursday that human genes cannot be patented, a victory for "patient care and medical innovation," that will allow greater access to genetic testing and more affordable treatment for cancer patients, the American Civil Liberties Union said today.
The court decision invalidated patents on two genes associated with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer in response to a lawsuit filed by the ACLU and the Public Patent Foundation (PUBPAT) on behalf of women's health groups and thousands of researchers, health professionals and patients.
The case concerned patents on human genes held by Myriad Genetics, a Utah based corporation, on human genes that are tied to the risk of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer--an issue that received public attention in May when actress Angelina Jolie revealed she had a preventive double mastectomy. The news spawned debate over the procedure that is out of reach for most patients because of the extremely high costs related to Myriad's monopoly over the genes.
Myriad's patents had allowed them to set the terms and cost of testing the genes and "made it difficult for women to access alternate tests or get a comprehensive second opinion about their results," the ACLU explains.
ACLU continues:
The patents allowed a Utah company, Myriad Genetics, to control access to the genes, known as BRCA1 and BRCA2, thereby giving them the right to limit others from doing research or diagnostic testing of the genes, which can be crucial for individuals making important medical decisions.
"Today, the court struck down a major barrier to patient care and medical innovation," said Sandra Park, senior staff attorney with the ACLU Women's Rights Project. "Myriad did not invent the BRCA genes and should not control them. Because of this ruling, patients will have greater access to genetic testing and scientists can engage in research on these genes without fear of being sued."
The decision is a major shift in patent law pertaining to human biology and declares that all the patents on human genes are invalid.
Justice Clarence Thomas, who wrote the court's decision, stated:
"We hold that a naturally occurring DNA segment is a product of nature and not patent eligible merely because it has been isolated."
"The court rightfully found that patents cannot be awarded for something so fundamental to nature as DNA," said Daniel B. Ravicher, executive director of PUBPAT and co-counsel in the lawsuit.
"I'm relieved that no other women will have to go through what I went through," said Lisbeth Ceriani, a breast cancer survivor and plaintiff in the case, who was faced with having to pay over $4,000 for Myriad's testing. "I'm so glad that the Supreme Court agrees that women deserve full access to vital information from their own bodies."
The court did, however, rule that "synthetically produced genetic material" could be patented as opposed to genes extracted from the human body, known as isolated DNA.
_____________________
Jacob Chamberlain
Jacob Chamberlain is a former staff writer for Common Dreams. His website is www.jacobpchamberlain.com.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously Thursday that human genes cannot be patented, a victory for "patient care and medical innovation," that will allow greater access to genetic testing and more affordable treatment for cancer patients, the American Civil Liberties Union said today.
The court decision invalidated patents on two genes associated with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer in response to a lawsuit filed by the ACLU and the Public Patent Foundation (PUBPAT) on behalf of women's health groups and thousands of researchers, health professionals and patients.
The case concerned patents on human genes held by Myriad Genetics, a Utah based corporation, on human genes that are tied to the risk of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer--an issue that received public attention in May when actress Angelina Jolie revealed she had a preventive double mastectomy. The news spawned debate over the procedure that is out of reach for most patients because of the extremely high costs related to Myriad's monopoly over the genes.
Myriad's patents had allowed them to set the terms and cost of testing the genes and "made it difficult for women to access alternate tests or get a comprehensive second opinion about their results," the ACLU explains.
ACLU continues:
The patents allowed a Utah company, Myriad Genetics, to control access to the genes, known as BRCA1 and BRCA2, thereby giving them the right to limit others from doing research or diagnostic testing of the genes, which can be crucial for individuals making important medical decisions.
"Today, the court struck down a major barrier to patient care and medical innovation," said Sandra Park, senior staff attorney with the ACLU Women's Rights Project. "Myriad did not invent the BRCA genes and should not control them. Because of this ruling, patients will have greater access to genetic testing and scientists can engage in research on these genes without fear of being sued."
The decision is a major shift in patent law pertaining to human biology and declares that all the patents on human genes are invalid.
Justice Clarence Thomas, who wrote the court's decision, stated:
"We hold that a naturally occurring DNA segment is a product of nature and not patent eligible merely because it has been isolated."
"The court rightfully found that patents cannot be awarded for something so fundamental to nature as DNA," said Daniel B. Ravicher, executive director of PUBPAT and co-counsel in the lawsuit.
"I'm relieved that no other women will have to go through what I went through," said Lisbeth Ceriani, a breast cancer survivor and plaintiff in the case, who was faced with having to pay over $4,000 for Myriad's testing. "I'm so glad that the Supreme Court agrees that women deserve full access to vital information from their own bodies."
The court did, however, rule that "synthetically produced genetic material" could be patented as opposed to genes extracted from the human body, known as isolated DNA.
_____________________
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.