Sixth Letter to Uncle Sam

15/6/13

Hey Uncle Sam,

I hope that stuff about Angelina Jolie’s breasts in my last letter didn’t embarrass you into silence. I’d actually meant to write to you about a less awkward but more important subject raised by what Time magazine called “the Angelina effect”: the subject of gene patenting. Yes, your genes, your DNA, owned, bought and sold by some private Biotech Company as if they were pieces of prime real estate! Creepy, don’t you think, Uncle?

Not only creepy but also patently unfair. Jolie, as you know, had the preventative mastectomy after a test revealed that she had inherited a faulty copy of a gene that put her at high risk for breast cancer. The cost of that test, which was offered only by a Utah based biotech company called Myriad Genetics, cost more than $3000, putting it out of reach for most women around the world. Since Myriad Genetics had patented the two genes responsible for hereditary breast cancer, the company was able to monopolize the development of tests to detect their mutations. It also blocked others from conducting tests based on its discovery by filing patent infringement suits against some of them.
How, in your vast wisdom, Uncle, did you let private corporations own biological life forms, whether cotton or sheep or human genes? Not being as enlightened in the ways of capitalism as those of us who live in the land of the free and the home of the brave, farmers in my father’s ancestral village in India are shocked when they learn that the communally developed turmeric, neem, and basmati rice they’ve cultivated for centuries have suddenly become the private property of some multinational corporation. Unable to comprehend or fight what they, in their ignorance, call biopiracy, these debt-ridden farmers have been committing suicide in the hundreds. Just like women who couldn’t afford the test Jolie could were probably dying from breast cancer.

That’s why, Almighty Uncle, I hope you’re just a little bit glad that the U.S. Supreme Court has stepped in where you should’ve. In the potentially landmark ruling handed out last week, the Supreme Court found a middle ground, saying that Myriad Genetics can't actually patent the naturally occurring genes BRCA1 and BRCA2 although it can keep its patents on synthetic versions of the genes that it has created. Writing for the court, Justice Clarence Thomas stated, “Myriad did not create anything. To be sure, it found an important and useful gene, but separating that gene from its surrounding genetic material is not an act of invention.” Noting that “groundbreaking, innovative or even brilliant discovery does not by itself satisfy the criteria” for patent eligibility, Justice Thomas argued that “a naturally occurring DNA segment is a product of nature and not patent eligible merely because it has been isolated. It is undisputed that Myriad did not create or alter any of the genetic information encoded in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes.” Companies “may patent the methods of isolating genes,” added Justice Thomas, “but the processes used by Myriad to isolate DNA were well understood by geneticists.” Even as the court ruled that merely isolating a gene is not enough, it also said that manipulating a gene to create something not found in nature is an invention eligible for patent protection. “The lab technician unquestionably creates something new when cDNA is made,” Justice Thomas wrote, leaving the door open to other ways for biotech companies to profit from their research. He further added that companies may obtain patents on new applications of knowledge gained from genetic research.
Well Uncle, it appears that the Supreme Court ruling will have some positive impact on the breast cancer gene situation at least. Since other companies and research institutions have already come forward and announced intentions to develop more tests, it is likely that the price of testing will gradually come down and more women will be able to take advantage of it.

Until next time,

--CK