Patenting stem cells is 'ethical'

[Bhaskar]

Patenting stem cells is 'ethical'

By Dr Matt Wilkinson


Robotics could speed up stem cell researchCellartis channels Scottish expertise in stem cells UK chimeric stem cell research in the balance Ethical Stem Cell Source

News Archives

All news for March 2007
All news for February 2007

09/03/2007 - A recent article published in the journal Stem Cell has advocated the patenting of isolated stem cell lines.

The authors argue that because the isolation of stem cells implies modification, product patents should apply where the results are novel due to the fact that they believe that an isolated embryonic stem cell represents a culture artefact and is not equivalent to the cells of the embryo.

They conclude that an isolated stem cell could be distinguished as something different to the stem cell existing as part of the human body.

The conclusions were reached during a collaboration between ethics
researchers Mats G. Hansson and Gert Helgesson, of the Center for Bioethics, Richard Wessman at the Department of Law, Uppsala University, and stem cell researcher, Rudolf Jaenisch of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. ...............

More : http://www.biopharma-reporter.com/news/ng.asp?n=74866-stem-cell-

[dan_nc]

I find it interesting that the EPO rejected WARF's patent application for processes and materials.

[Wise Young]

Patenting stem cells is 'ethical'

By Dr Matt Wilkinson


Robotics could speed up stem cell researchCellartis channels Scottish expertise in stem cells UK chimeric stem cell research in the balance Ethical Stem Cell Source

News Archives

All news for March 2007
All news for February 2007

09/03/2007 - A recent article published in the journal Stem Cell has advocated the patenting of isolated stem cell lines.

The authors argue that because the isolation of stem cells implies modification, product patents should apply where the results are novel due to the fact that they believe that an isolated embryonic stem cell represents a culture artefact and is not equivalent to the cells of the embryo.

They conclude that an isolated stem cell could be distinguished as something different to the stem cell existing as part of the human body.

The conclusions were reached during a collaboration between ethics
researchers Mats G. Hansson and Gert Helgesson, of the Center for Bioethics, Richard Wessman at the Department of Law, Uppsala University, and stem cell researcher, Rudolf Jaenisch of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. ...............

More : http://www.biopharma-reporter.com/news/ng.asp?n=74866-stem-cell-


The question of patenting treatments, technology, and stem cell lines is very difficult with strong arguments on all sides. Let me start by giving the traditional biotechnology argument, that one should always patent technologhy and cell lines. One can always make the decision later concerning what to do with the technology, including allowing free use of the patented invention.

• Patent it. The argument for patenting the technology is that nobody would invest in a technology if it is not protected by patents. This is true of pharmaceutical, biotechnology,and even the most altruistic individual investors. They want to some kind of of control of the technology. Without that investment, many promising therapies have languished in the confines of laboratories.

• Don't patent it. If a technology is not patented but is published, it becomes part to the "public domain". There are some who believe that we should not patent therapies, because it is generating a variety of undesirable behaviors by drug and biotech companies. First, companies focus on only patented therapies and for large markets of over a $1 billion. Second, not patenting will reduce the cost of the therapy. Third, companies that license technology may not develop it for spinal cord injury because it is a smal market.

Wise.