I’ll get the bragging out of the way quickly: This Spring I won the Persuasive category of the Student Speakers Bureau competition, put on by the USC Office of Undergraduate Programs. I’ll be honest, I only “beat” 8 or so other speakers, but there were certainly a few very good ones among them that were just as much deserving of honor as I. Specifically, there were speeches about US policy on immigration and torture that were absolutely excellent.
That said, here is the text of my speech. I didn’t source much of it in the interest of time (It was a timed speech), but if there is demand I will post some links on the subject. Enjoy!
Everyone knows from watching shows like CSI and Law & Order that the DNA of a particular person is unique to the tune of one in several hundred billion. What some might not know, however, is that much of the human genome is shared by all members of the species. The genome consists of about 3 billion units called DNA base pairs, and nearly all of these are the same from person to person. These 3 billion base pairs make up about 25,000 genes, which are the functional units of inheritance. For example, there are genes that code for hair color, eye color, and propensity toward certain behaviors. The genes of your mother and father interact to give you your own unique set of genes, which are at least partially responsible for how you look, act, and feel. Basically, your genes make you “you.”
If you agree with that statement, then pharmaceutical companies and universities across the globe combine to own about 20% of “you.” Over 4,000 human genes have been issued patents by the United States Patent Office since the first patent was issued in 1978 for the gene which codes for the production of Human Growth Hormone. At first it is rather unnerving to learn that various corporations “own” about one fifth of your genetic code. Putting the situation into context helps a bit. For example, if a scientist were to isolate a chemical from a plant with some sort of new medicinal value, he would be able to patent that chemical if he identified a unique application for it. This seems reasonable enough: The scientist has worked for countless hours and probably spent thousands or millions of dollars researching, so when he identifies a new application for a natural chemical, he should be awarded a patent so all of his hard work isn’t appropriated by someone else.
The human genome is somewhat like this. The DNA found inside every cell of your body is just as much a natural chemical as anything that comes from a plant. However, there are unique costs associated with the patenting of the human genome that are not associated with the patenting of plant chemicals or any other process, for that matter. Today I’d like to speak with you about two of these costs and ultimately show you why allowing pharmaceutical companies and universities to essentially own your DNA is a harmful thing.
The first reason allowing gene patents is harmful is that it stifles innovation in the field of biotechnology. To understand this, it’s important to understand how patents normally promote innovation. What a patent does, essentially, is give an inventor the right to stop others from making, using, or selling his invention without his permission. This promotes innovation in a capitalist society such as ours. Since one cannot simply copy a patented invention, the only way to succeed against a patented invention in a free market is to invent something better. With this in mind, the reason patents are incompatible with the human genome is obvious: There’s only one genome. A gene is what it is, there is no way to expand upon it in an innovative or inventive manner. Thus, the idea of patenting a gene is flawed on the most fundamental level.
The second reason gene patents ought to be disallowed is that these patents are granted at a cost to human lives. One of the best-known examples of this occurs with what is known as “The Breast Cancer Gene.” As the name bluntly implies, this is a gene that, when present, indicates a high risk for breast cancer. There is a relatively simple test to determine whether a woman possesses this gene. The lab fees and labor cost about $1000. But if you were to get this test today, it would cost you $3000. Why? Because the gene is patented, and the holder can charge whatever he wants. And he does.
Fortunately, the government is granted the power to overturn a patent if they feel it is vital for the public good. Congressmen Xavier Beccera, a Democrat from California, and Dave Weldon, a Republican of Florida, have taken a step in the interest of the public good by introducing the “Genomic Research and Accessibility Act” to Congress on February 9. This bill is currently making its way through Congress, and calls, plainly and simply, for “prohibition on patent of human genetic material.” Unfortunately, while this bill is a step in the right direction, it is not retroactive; that is, it will not affect the 4,000 patents that have already been granted. Thus, if you are interested in reclaiming 20% of your genetic code, I urge you to contact your congressmen and women and ask them to support an amended version of this bill that would return your mistakenly attributed genetic sequence to its rightful owner.
Thank you.
Note: If you recognize this post, it is because I’ve imported it from an older blog of mine (”Tom Burke Presentations” on Blogspot), which is now defunct.
If you liked this post, check these out...
0 responses so far ↓
There are no comments yet...Kick things off by filling out the form below.
Leave a Comment