Sherwood V. Walker: Court Case

We cannot obtain a “Yes” or “No” answer on “Will the Supreme Court’s decision affect the amount of research that is conducted to find naturally occurring disease-causing DNA sequences”. It is because the statue is clearly stated that things that are created or invented can be applied to obtain a patent when those things are (1) novel, (2) useful, and (3) nonobvious (Cheeseman, 2015, P.135). Although discovering the disease-causing DNA sequences cannot be patented, the medicine or drug formulation on curing based on the related research can apply for a patent because it is an “invention”.

The following case analysis seeks to examine the Supreme Court’s decisions in Racine v. Woods, [1983] 2 S.C.R. 173, in regard to the legal questions, basis of reasoning, as well as the cultural implications.

Michael Crichton makes a good point when talking about the examples given. The situation dealing with Canavan disease and the Miami Children's Hospital Research Institute is a good example of how gene patenting can block the general population from enjoying a medical advancement. Another example is when Crichton states, “When SARS was spreading across the globe, medical researchers hesitated to study it because of patent concerns” (442 par. 12). Gene patenting has a fundamental flaw in it because it is slowing the advancement of modern medicine. Gene patenting blocks researchers from looking into genes that companies own and demands royalties every time the patent is in use. This is a problem that the United States needs to address so that patients can enjoy all the medical advancements that are in reach for the future.

The Supreme Court does a great deal for our nation today. Everyday they work on ongoing cases, making some very difficult decisions. One of these cases is the case of Timothy Carpenter, who believes it was unconstitutional when the FBI searched his cell phone records without a warrant.

I really enjoyed your post as I did not know it was possible to patent a gene. I really liked the examples you gave as it helped me understand what it means for a gene to be patent and what it affects it can have on the patient and their family. I believe this is something that should not be legal as if someone else can find a cure for diseases instead of the organization who owns it they should be allowed to do so.

This leads them to believe that errors in the human gene pool could be introduced, and that new diseases could be created. This is a valid concern because if the whole point of this is to prevent diseases, then adding new one's would deem it pointless.

Secondly, it reduces the time for patient’s evaluation. Due to DTC, drug companies are rarely encouraged to research and evaluate the effect of drugs on patients. The companies do not research enough to evaluate the side effects of drugs before the drug administration. This will cause crucial damages to patient’s health. Same is the case facing by PharmaCARE who had to face negative consequences of drugs because the company was having lack of research before administrating the drug. Due to direct marketing, patents do not feel the need for taking doctor opinion and take self-treatment which sometime cause risk to patients life.

Patent Genes have been the center of a attention for a very long time. When we take the time to stop and think about how research and medical cost affect our lifestyles, it is very alarming to know that even the natural occurrences in life can be bought for the right price. In the op-ed piece and article, “Patenting Life” and “Decoding the Use of Gene Patents”, by Michael Crichton and John E. Calfee, both authors draw attention to the uses of patenting genes. Crichton goes on to say how gene patents have interfered with medical testings, research studies, and the miscommunications between doctors and their patients, while Calfee reiterates how patients and researchers are getting the benefits that come from patenting genes. Although both authors

As a result of the funding for such testing, many believe the breakthrough for curing diseases is around the corner. The decision is whether or not America wants to take a step forward and progress their knowledge in medicine. Nobody agreed it would be easy, but as any other advancement in medicine, one must concur the future is near. Ultimately getting a specific drug tailored to your genetic sequence might be helpful to possibly eradicate and possibly cure deadly diseases and disorders. Within the past few years, many breakthroughs in medical advancements came through as some neurosurgeons complete brain surgeries while the patient is awake. Such testing poses crucial features to preventing things from going wrong. Similarly, being provided with the needed tools, one can hope the next step is toward cures for age-old monstrosities. Although not being enforced, many doctors are willing to refer their patients to get their genes tested. Next time a visit to the doctor’s office is scheduled, feel free to ask about a glimpse into what your future

Genetic engineering has been the subject of controversy since it first started. There is a lot of fear and concern surrounding the possibilities it presents. It is difficult to make ethical decisions about genetic engineering because if offers opportunities to solve many genetic problems such as hereditary diseases. The consequences are positive and negative, but there is no way to determine which will have a greater impact. Genetic engineering could lead to new treatments for hereditary diseases, but it could also have long-term adverse effects. Although there are benefits to genetic engineering, the negative side cannot be overlooked.

Ideally a patent is not supposed to give monopoly over an idea to an inventor unless the idea is useful to the public. Thus, a gene should be shown to be capable of being useful to the public in the form of new products or treatment, before anyone should be able to patent it.

While this case is literally full of negative aspects, we will only focus on the main points for both arguments. Pharmaceutical companies want to be sure that the products they spend years and millions of dollars to create are not easily reproduced and sold at discount prices. The profits pharmaceuticals make of their patented products are supposed to refinance new research. So taking away their exclusive distribution rights and allowing other manufacturers to just copy the product and sell it at

There are many human medical problems that can be controlled by early detection. This program would be incredibly beneficial to the fight of those diseases. Also as a medical benefit is the possibility of gene therapy drugs that could prevent or cure disease. They also could reach as far as to eradicate many of the killers that have plagued mankind for generations. These are some of the reasons that many large companies are attempting to align themselves with other companies that have the technology to capitalize from these new findings. Projections of DNA-based products and technologies in the biotech industry are exceeding $45 billion by the year 2009.

This would mean that this testing would be more affordable for the commoner. Once testing has been completed and data interpreted, someone will know if they are a carrier for a genetic disorder. If it turns out that they are, instead of waiting for symptoms to arise, genetic treatment of the disease can be done to save the person’s life before it is even in jeopardy. This could prove to be very helpful. People spend thousands of dollars on treatments for a genetic disorder, and the treatments do not even fully rid the patient of the disease. The patient will have to take the medication for the rest of their life to calm the symptoms of that disease. With the advancement of gene therapy, a patient could receive a minimal number of treatments which will not just calm the symptoms but rid the patient of their genetic disorder completely. This, in the long run, could save the patient time, money, suffering, and ultimately it will save their life. This is only the beginning. As time passes, doctors will have the knowledge to save many more lives in the same manner.

Therefore, protection of patents is one of the key conditions necessary for further development of the pharmaceutical industry. At the same time, non-efficient legislation that does not provide the necessary level of patent protection is one of the factors that hamper expansion of “Big Pharmaceutical” companies to the developing countries8.