Several U.S. Supreme Court justices expressed skepticism this week over whether companies can patent genes, during a hearing that could reshape the future of the biotech industry. The court heard arguments over patents held by Myriad Genetics on two human genes, which, when mutated, give a woman a higher risk of developing breast or ovarian cancer. The patents give the Utah firm a monopoly on testing for those mutations. A lawyer for Myriad said that voiding the patents would deter other scientists and investors from trying to make advances with natural materials. But Justice Elena Kagan questioned whether, under Myriad’s argument, a patent could be awarded to the “first person who found a liver.” And Justice Samuel Alito—a conservative—noted that while a company could patent the process used to extract a cancer treatment from a leaf, it could not “patent the plant” itself.
Granting these absurd patents is not in the public interest, said Marcy Darnovsky in the Los Angeles Times. Myriad’s strict patent enforcement “means its test is the only available one to determine whether a woman has a genetic variant that increases her risk of cancer.” Women can’t get a second opinion, even when facing a decision about removing a healthy organ to lower their cancer risk.
The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
Join more than 350,000 subscribers and keep yourself informed with a selection of The Week’s most interesting, enlightening and entertaining stories - plus daily puzzles.
Join more than 350,000 subscribers and keep yourself informed with a selection of The Week’s most interesting, enlightening and entertaining stories - plus daily puzzles.