Read Isolated DNA belongs to nature, says US by Bob Willis. What is a patent? Why have biotech companies patented DNA? What does the US government say? Who do you think should own DNA? Why?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
This is the blog for Ms. Hero's Biology Class at Carlmont High School. Articles related to what we are studying in class will be posted with prompts for student response.
How to Post a Comment
- 1. Read Ms. Hero's blog post, any links on the post, and all the comments that have been left so far.
- 2. Pick one post and make a comment and sign with your FIRST name and LAST INITIAL ONLY, followed by your class period.
- 3. Write a paragraph comment based on the article and/or what other students have commented on.
Grading Rubric
- 20 Points: Relates article to what we are learning in class, grammatically correct, 5-7 sentences.
- 15 Points: Relates article to what we are learning in class, some grammatical errors or not 5-7 sentences.
- 10 Points: Doesn't relate article to what we are learning, grammar errors, or not 5 to 7 sentences.
Posts
Blog Archive
-
▼
2010
(97)
-
▼
October
(18)
- Green Pigs?
- Who owns your DNA?
- Genetics of Autism
- If you are in 4th period, please respond to this p...
- If you are in 5th period, please respond to this p...
- If you are in 6th period, please respond to this p...
- If you are in 7th period, please respond to this p...
- 4th Period: Size of the Human Genome
- 5th Period: Size of the Human Genome
- 6th Period: Size of the Human Genome
- 7th Period: Size of the Human Genome
- If you are in 4th Period, respond to this post.
- If you are in 5th Period, respond to this post.
- If you are in 6th Period, respond to this post.
- If you are in 7th Period, respond to this post.
- Halloween Corn Mazes
- Fat - the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly
- Micracle Tomatoes
-
▼
October
(18)
A patent is a document that states that a subject has discovered something and would like to put it under their name so that no one else can use it unless they have permission from the inventor. Biotech companies have decided to put patents on their research in order for no one to be able to copy what they have found or try and build upon it without the company's permission. In the past, the U.S. government has allowed patents on genes but is now thinking about revoking that privileged. In my opinion, no one should be able to own DNA. DNA is what keeps us all alive in this world and for one person to own it seems wrong to me. Personally, I believe the government shouldn't let patents to be made on DNA.
ReplyDeleteA patent is simply paperwork filed with the U.S. government that allows a person or company to own the rights to a certain thing for a certain period of time, unless they are abstract ideas, rules of nature, or natural phenomena. Biotechnological companies have patented DNA because they wanted to make more money off a product. If another company would infringe on their DNA patents, then the company infringed on has the right to sue. The U.S government used to think that this is alright. But recently it changed its stance, saying that DNA is a natural phenomenon, and thus not patentable. I do not think anybody should be able to own DNA, because that means that at some point, companies will own humans.
ReplyDeleteA patent is a selective right to an inventor by a government to fabricate, use, or sell an invention for a specific time period. Now this relates to what we are currently learning in class because biotech companies have been patenting isolated DNA. One company located in Salt Lake City, Utah, Myriad Genetics, has patented the human genes BRCA1 and BRCA2, which they use for sighting breast cancer. However, this has kept other scientists from discovering other ways to detect breast cancer as they are restricted from using the genes. Meanwhile, the US government disagreed with Myriad's patent, stating that they "are directed to a law of nature and were therefore improperly granted."
ReplyDeletePatent is the right granted by the government to an inventor or manufacture. Biotechnology companies patented DNA because it could help with diagnostic testing and research that could lead to cures. It could also limit women's medical options. The US government says that isolated DNA is a patentable subject. I think that no one should own DNA because DNA is something inside a living thing. If someone owns DNA, its practically telling them they own that living thing. DNA can help with research and tests but it shouldn't be able to be owned by the government or scientists.
ReplyDeleteA patent is a special permit allowing only one person or company to make capital off of something, such as an invention or product. Biotech companies have patented DNA so that other companies who want to use the DNA have to pay them to use it. The government says that isolated human DNA cannot be patented, much like coal extracted from the earth. I think that nobody should own DNA. Owning genetic information is not unlike monopolizing an industry; if DNA could be "owned," then a company could patent the entire genome of a species and effectively own the species. This is unethical as people could technically be born under ownership of a biotech company, which is like slavery in a way. I think that engineered genes would be okay if patentable, but anything more than that could cause human rights issues and may even start a "Gene War."
ReplyDeleteA patent is a right granted by the government to an inventor. The reason that biotech companies have patented DNA is because the new type of dna could possibly be stolen and resold to make a better profit. The US government says that they should not be allowed to patent DNA because it I'd a product of nature. Also it would be inhumane and cruel to own another human being. I think that no company or other person should own your DNA besides yourself. Furthermore it would lead back to the concept of slavery where one human could own another.
ReplyDeleteI do think that this is a very controversial topic. My position is the same as the US's. Patenting living things can never end up good. As we saw in the film in class, the products are patented, everything is fine until the organism starts multiplying. This is a good example of human envasion.
ReplyDeleteA patent is an excluisive act granted by the government to an inventor. Inventions are generally protected by patents. Companies patend DNA for research, to find cures for cancer, and other medical options.In the past the goverment was okay with this, but now the government says that genes can only be patend if isolated from their natrual state, and purified. I disagree with DNA being patend because human genes are a product of nature, and no one should have the right to own nature
ReplyDeleteA patent is a right or document issued to a company for the use of an object or thing by the government. A patent allows a company to have full control over the object and "own" it. The Biotech Companies want to patent DNA so they can research cures for diseases such as cancer.The US Government has now banned DNA from being patented, saying tht it is a natural element. I agree with the government because DNA should not be something that can be owned.
ReplyDeleteSome one discovered an isolated DNA that detected breast cancer. He asked for a patent for the DNA, but the DNA couldn't have a patent because it,"Directed to a law of nature" said a US district judge. There was also a law about how DNA couldn't be patented without being isolated, which the DNA was, but the judge ruling said that the DNA was to close to breaking a patent lawsuit so they denied the patent.
ReplyDeleteHow can one human be considered property in non-subhuman conditions? When they're company patented. It is stated in the Constitution of America that products of nature cannot be patented and is no less a product when it is isolated from its original source. Biotechnology companies still manage to do their 'experiments' on stem cells and biological engineering. Most people think that its unethical to own life, which seems to everyone the answer. A patent give the ownership to a creator or finder, but even that should have limits on the market.
ReplyDeleteZhenya F. 7
A patent is a permit issued by the government allowing a person or company to make money off of an invention or product. Many biotech companies have patented DNA so they can charge other companies who want to use their DNA.The government now claims that isolated human DNA cannot be patented, for the same reason that mined coal cannot be patented. If it was possible to own genetic information, it could be possible to monopolize the industry. Such a company could then patent the genes of an entire species, effectively and legally owning that species. All this would lead to the frightening idea that someone could be owned by a company.I believe that some genes should be able to be patented, but not genes that could result in human rights issues.
ReplyDelete-Ted A. 7°
Genetics is something everyone must have. If one creates a gene, they used to be able to put a patent on it. Now, these old judgments are challenged. if the one with the altered gene "interbreeds", the offspring will probably get the gene. Since the gene is patented, the company will now own the child. This is just like slavery, something that has been abolished by the bill of rights for many years now, and is the thought that one man can own another.
ReplyDeleteA patent is a document that allows the inventor of an invention to exclude others from reproducing the same thing. Patents are used to protect the rights of people’s hard work and to prevent replication of that work. In this case, the biotech companies have patented DNA in order to prevent people from stealing their discoveries. You cannot get a patent on nature, and seeing as DNA is a natural product, the US government said you cannot have a patent on DNA. I believe that people shouldn’t have the right to patent DNA, seeing as it is immoral and inhumane. Charging people for randomly having DNA belonging to someone else is unreasonable, and even as DNA is derived from nature.
ReplyDeleteIn this article it defines a patent. A patent is a right granted by the government. Biotech companies have requested patents because they want to own the DNA they creat or modify. The US government says that all DNA, isolated, modified or not, is a product of nature and "is no less a product". I think that whose ever DNA is it should own it no matter what. I disagree on the fact that DNA is naturally made. If it happens to be a plant, so be it. But, that doesn't give scientists that right to take DNA without giving something back.
ReplyDeleteA patent is a government made file that striclty prohibits others from using/reinventing the same thing, so the inventors idea doesn't get stolen. Biotech companies are patenting DNA so there DNA can't be stolen and redesigned. Since some of the new DNA can transform/help medical technology then they want to be the ones giving permission which always gives them a nice big profit. Unfortunately, the US Patent organization and government are in a discussion to let this happen because it violates the product of nature. See they didn't invent it they created/discovered it, like they found a route to get somewhere. This can lead to a violation in human rights. If I own DNA then I can own everything alive. That isn't fair. Discovering something to help people shouldn't be patened it should be shared, but the wealthy CEO's minds don't think like that, at least some don't
ReplyDelete