www.aclu.orgJOIN THE ACLUTAKE ACTIONDONATEABOUT US
ACLU Blog of Rights - Official Blog of the ACLU National Office Blog of Rights Homepage Support the ACLU

Join Us At:

Aug 19th, 2009 Google Bookmarks Technorati StumbleUpon Digg! Reddit Delicious Facebook
Posted by Tania Simoncelli, Technology & Liberty Program at 11:02am

Genome Redacted?

(Originally posted on Daily Kos.)

Last week, the New York Times reported that a Stanford engineer has developed a new technology to sequence the entire human genome for less than $50,000. This is a remarkable reduction from the $20 million estimate of three years ago, and it's half the price currently offered by the personal genomics company Knome (pronounced "know-me"). Dr. Stephen Quake, the Stanford inventor, claims his new Heliscope Single Molecule Sequencer's ability to decode a human genome in four weeks with a staff of three people will serve to "democratize access to the fruits of the genome revolution."

There is no question that faster and cheaper sequencing technologies such as this one will bode well in our quest to understand the genetic underpinnings of complex diseases. Yet there is another serious impediment to the medical uses of our genomes that could seriously limit — if not render moot — the benefits of this and other dramatic advances in next generation sequencing.

Starting 20 or so years ago, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) began issuing patents on human genetic sequences. Approximately 20 percent of our genes, including those that have been associated with breast and ovarian cancer, Alzheimer's, asthma, and muscular dystrophy, are currently controlled by private corporations, universities, and individuals.

The PTO's decision to issue patents on chunks of our genetic code was a serious mistake. Genes are products of nature. They were not invented, but inherited across species and over thousands of generations. The law is clear that products of nature are not patentable subject matter. The genetic code is also information - basic scientific knowledge. And you can't patent that either.

Moreover, the decision to issue patents on genes was driven, in part, by the flawed notion that the causes of each of our most dreaded diseases could be attributed to a single gene. The "one gene, one disease" theory has since been thoroughly debunked. It is now common knowledge that, with very few exceptions, things are far more complicated. Diseases such as cancer and autism involve not one gene, but many, as well as interactions among those genes (not to mention the environment).

The pathway toward understanding this complex terrain might very well depend on access to the genome in its entirety. But gene patents are poised to stand in the way of patient care. Some patent holders have used their patents to retain a strict monopoly on gene sequencing in clinical settings, preventing other labs from offering cheaper and sometimes more comprehensive diagnostic testing to patients. This problem will only worsen as researchers interested in developing multi-gene tests are faced with an expanding thicket of patents.

To address this and other problems associated with these patents, the ACLU has filed a lawsuit challenging the patenting of human genes.

The era of the $1,000 personal genome may be approaching. But its utility for doctors and patients will depend on whether patent-holders continue to be allowed to control access to certain genes. There is no reason to expect that especially aggressive patent-holders will allow other companies to include "their" genes in comprehensive genome testing. The pathway to personalized medicine demands that we have access to our full genetic sequence — not one with gaping holes where the most critical stretches of information lie.

Google Bookmarks Technorati StumbleUpon Digg! Reddit Delicious Facebook
We intend the comments portion of this blog to be a forum where you can freely express your views on blog postings and on comments made by other people. Given that, please understand that you are responsible for the material you post on the comments portion of this blog. The only postings that we ask that you refrain from posting and that we cannot permit on our website are requests for legal assistance and postings that could cause ACLU to incur legal liability.

One important law in that regard is the prohibition on politically partisan activity. Given our nonprofit status, we may not endorse or oppose candidates for elective office. That means we cannot host comments on our site that show a preference for one candidate or party. Although we in no way wish to discourage you from that activity elsewhere, we ask that you not engage in that activity on our website (or include links to other websites that do so). Additionally, given that we are subject to very specific rules concerning the collection of personally identifying information through our website (names, email addresses, home address, financial information, etc.), we ask that you not use the comments portion of this blog to solicit this information from users of our website. We also ask that you not use the comments portion for advertising or requests for legal assistance, and do not add to your comment links to other websites, as we cannot be responsible for the content on other websites.

We are not able to respond to unsolicited inquiries, complaints or requests for assistance sent to this blog. Please direct your complaint or request for assistance to the ACLU affiliate in your state. Requests for legal assistance left in the blog comments will not receive a response or be published.

Finally, the ACLU cannot guarantee the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any information in the comment section and expressly disclaims any liability for any information in this section.

3 Responses to "Genome Redacted?"

  1. Maggie Says:

    I personally don't like the idea of anyone having my genome material. I don't care who it is.

  2. Richard Bowser Says:

    News flash: Autism is NOT a disease! Instead, they are properly classified as developmental DISORDERS. The National Institutes of Health have excellent information available. See http://www.nichd.nih.gov/health/topics/asd.cfm or http://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/publications/autism/what-are-the-autism -spectrum-disorders.shtml

  3. Cliff Says:

    It's 99.9% (or thereabouts) not yours, anyway. Let's just worry about the variable regions which can be used for identification and not the portions we all have and those which are shared by other metazoans.

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image. Ignore spaces and be careful about upper and lower case.
 

Quicksearch


© ACLU, 125 Broad Street, 18th Floor New York, NY 10004
This is the Web site of the American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU Foundation.
Learn more about the distinction between these two components of the ACLU.

User Agreement | Privacy Statement | FAQs | Site Map

Statistics image