I have always wondered how Myriad Genetics was able to patent the two BRCA genes. I always thought it was a little funny because they are essentially a body part. Now the Supreme Court has agreed (9-0) that genes cannot be patented as they are naturally occurring.
Its about time.
Patents are awarded for inventions and new ways of making things. So I never understood how Myriad Genetics could own the genes. They had the market cornered on the BRCA tests and charging $3300 for the test. Even though most insurance companies pay for it, this overcharge is just another way that insurance costs are paying for vastly inflated prices.
This will also impact the biotech industry as they develop new gene sequencing techniques and it should open up genomics as researchers don't have to worry about infringing on another's patented gene.
This has been a long awaited decision that received very little press. It did make the front page of the newspaper in biotech happy Boston but I couldn't find it on CNN.
I call this progress and can actually agree with the Supreme Court on this decision.
Showing posts with label genes. Show all posts
Showing posts with label genes. Show all posts
Would you want to know?
I have blogged about this before. If you could do a genetic test to find out if you are likely to get an ailment and die of it, would you want to know?
I am still up in the air on this one. I was interested to read about a 21 year old woman who has the BRCA 1 gene, watched her mother die of cancer, but has decided she doesn't want to know. Her choice is to live an unstressed like without the burden of the knowledge that she could die of cancer and what it would be like.
I can completely understand that point of view. Just because we can learn about our medical and genetic make up, do we have to learn it? I mean is there a benefit to living in ignorance and letting life happen around us with out having to learn what might or might not happen to us?
Why are we supposed to learn to see what the future brings? I have never been to a palm reading or a fortune teller or anything. I haven't really wanted to. Isn't it better to have life unfold as it may than to plan and learn and change ourselves to compensate for what we learn?
Hindsight in light is always 20/20 - we always look back and think back how we could have done better or differently or improved the outcome. But is it really to our benefit to think how we might have done things differently? Then we spend too much time ruing our decisions.
This would complicate my life immensely. If I knew then I would have too much time to over plan my life which would cause me to spend time ruing my decisions and over thinking everything.
I don't want to know.
I am still up in the air on this one. I was interested to read about a 21 year old woman who has the BRCA 1 gene, watched her mother die of cancer, but has decided she doesn't want to know. Her choice is to live an unstressed like without the burden of the knowledge that she could die of cancer and what it would be like.
I can completely understand that point of view. Just because we can learn about our medical and genetic make up, do we have to learn it? I mean is there a benefit to living in ignorance and letting life happen around us with out having to learn what might or might not happen to us?
Why are we supposed to learn to see what the future brings? I have never been to a palm reading or a fortune teller or anything. I haven't really wanted to. Isn't it better to have life unfold as it may than to plan and learn and change ourselves to compensate for what we learn?
Hindsight in light is always 20/20 - we always look back and think back how we could have done better or differently or improved the outcome. But is it really to our benefit to think how we might have done things differently? Then we spend too much time ruing our decisions.
This would complicate my life immensely. If I knew then I would have too much time to over plan my life which would cause me to spend time ruing my decisions and over thinking everything.
I don't want to know.
Breast cancer is even more complicated than previously thought
And this is supposed to be good news? Personally I always look for the easy way out as my inherent laziness takes over. But this is supposed to be progress.
There was a study in England (because we needed yet another study)of the protein coding in 100 breast cancer tumors. The result showed how complex breast cancer really is.
The authors wrote in the online edition of Nature “A sobering perspective on the complexity and diversity of the disease is emerging,” ... which is publishing a series of studies of the genetic changes in breast cancer.
The scientists ... found 73 different combinations of disease-causing mutations in the tumors, each involving up to six different genes from a set of 40 “driver genes.”
Seven of the 40 individual driver genes were mutated in more than 10% of cases, but 33 others that were less common also contributed to the development of the cancers, the team reported. In 28 cases, a single mutation was enough to cause disease.
The researchers identified nine new genes that caused the cancers, and also found mutations in genes that were already known to cause breast and other cancers.
Discovering that a single disease — breast cancer — can appear in so many different guises means that developing targeted therapies tailored to a patient’s tumor type will remain a tall order in the near future.
After I read this about six times, it dawned on my tiny chemo brain that:
- they discovered nine new genes that cause breast cancer
- there are driver genes which are the real 'bad guys'
And this is progress? Well I guess if they find the genes that's a good start but its sort of like getting through a locked door and finding nine more locked doors behind them which you need to get through. The good news is you go through the first door. The bad news is there are nine more. And you have no idea what's behind them.
There was a study in England (because we needed yet another study)of the protein coding in 100 breast cancer tumors. The result showed how complex breast cancer really is.
The authors wrote in the online edition of Nature “A sobering perspective on the complexity and diversity of the disease is emerging,” ... which is publishing a series of studies of the genetic changes in breast cancer.
The scientists ... found 73 different combinations of disease-causing mutations in the tumors, each involving up to six different genes from a set of 40 “driver genes.”
Seven of the 40 individual driver genes were mutated in more than 10% of cases, but 33 others that were less common also contributed to the development of the cancers, the team reported. In 28 cases, a single mutation was enough to cause disease.
The researchers identified nine new genes that caused the cancers, and also found mutations in genes that were already known to cause breast and other cancers.
Discovering that a single disease — breast cancer — can appear in so many different guises means that developing targeted therapies tailored to a patient’s tumor type will remain a tall order in the near future.
After I read this about six times, it dawned on my tiny chemo brain that:
- they discovered nine new genes that cause breast cancer
- there are driver genes which are the real 'bad guys'
And this is progress? Well I guess if they find the genes that's a good start but its sort of like getting through a locked door and finding nine more locked doors behind them which you need to get through. The good news is you go through the first door. The bad news is there are nine more. And you have no idea what's behind them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
