This didn't take long

The Supreme Court announcement last month probably surprised no one more than Myriad Genetics who had 'patented' the BRCA genes. But is anyone surprised that less than 30 days later they have already sued two competitors who have rolled out BRCA tests?

That's right, lose your patents, your lawyers are bored so its time to start litigation. What a productive use waste of money.

Please, I am sure since the genes were first discovered others have figured out how to test them. Maybe Myriad should come up with ways to test for some of the other myriad of genes out there? (Or was that a really bad play on words?)

Patenting Genes Again

I have blogged about this before here and here. Who owns our genes? According to Myriad Genetics, which 'owns' the BRCA genes and tests and gets to charge $3,000 per test, they own the two BRCA genes. That sounds stupid, doesn't it? Apparently Myriad Genetics is full of rocket scientists who believe they can own parts of the human body that naturally occur. Maybe we can start selling patent rights to our big toes or something to pay our medical bills.

Well stupidity now faces the US Justice system as the Supreme Court announced on 11/30/2012 that they will hear the case on whether companies can patent human genes. As science and medical research grows and focus more and more on genetics this ruling could affect medical research in decades to come.

The two sides come down to this:

"The justices' decision will likely resolve an ongoing battle between scientists who believe that genes carrying the secrets of life should not be exploited for commercial gain and companies that argue that a patent is a reward for years of expensive research that moves science forward."

If we take this a step farther could lawn seed companies claim they own the genes in the grass seed they breed to make greener lawns so that we would need to pay rent to walk barefoot on the grass? Or someone could patent oxygen and we could start paying rent to breathe.

I am sure that the people with the BRCA gene would be happy to get rid of it so if Myriad wants to own the gene, why can't people get paid to have it taken out of their body?

I am in favor of the scientists, patients, medical research, and good health. I am against corporate greed.

I mean, seriously? Get over it. But now since it is going to the Supreme Court I am sure your lawyers will be rich by the time a decision is reached.

End of life medication

In Electionovember (this is not a political post), Massachusetts residents will have the opportunity to vote on End of Life Medication. There are several requirements to the law:

• Must be an MA resident
• Must have been given less than six months to life
• Must be capable of making and communicating medical decisions
• Must voluntarily make a wish to die and make an informed decision.

I will vote for this. First of all, I think it should be an option. If you are dying and in pain and there is no hope, why can't you say 'that's it' instead of lingering in pain for a few more weeks? If you disagree, you do not need to make the choice to do it.

The problem with these laws when they try to pass them, is people start saying 'well I would never do that' and people come out of the woodwork saying my neighbor's hair dresser's cousin's friend was given 3 months to live and 20 years later they are still here. Everyone has the right to their own beliefs and this is a law that would allow people to make a difficult decision if they wished.

What if you had something like Parkinson's or Alzheimer's which is irreversible and incurable and you knew you were destined to die over a period of months or years and you could make the decision while you were capable that you wanted to be prescribed end of life medication when you got down to the bitter end? If you know your lot in life is to die a slow and painful death, wouldn't you want a way to avoid the pain if you could? We do not know what is in our future and we could all end up in that circumstance. I think we should be allowed to have that choice if we choose to.

Law, religion, and medical care

This story saddened me. A 16 year old girl who was 13 weeks pregnant died from complications from leukemia in the Dominican Republic. The Dominican Republic constitution forbids abortion which I believe is within their rights to decide as a country. This is probably due to the main religion of the country - Catholicism. Her doctors were concerned that chemotherapy would induce an abortion. It took 20 days to reach the decision that she could receive chemotherapy. At that point she miscarried, had a cardiac arrest and could not be revived.

While I am certainly not going to get into a discussion on the Catholic church's opinion of abortion or the Dominican Republic's Constitution, nor discuss the subject of teen pregnancy, I do feel that the purpose of the Hippocratic Oath was to do no harm. To me this means taking care of the patient first. Where was the sense of urgency in making this decision to let her receive chemotherapy? Why wasn't the concern for the life of the mother taken into consideration?

It is just very sad that politics and religion interfere needlessly with medical care in this day and age.