- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Patenting the Human Genome: What should be allowed? What will the results be?
Posted on 12/19/17 at 1:19 pm
Posted on 12/19/17 at 1:19 pm
Can genes be patented? No for naturally occuring, yes for new sequences
So Scotus ruled in 2013 that you cannot patent the human genome, which at the time, was about 25% patented already (4,300 genes).
So now one must change DNA to be patentable.
Should you be able to patent DNA that might go into a human?
Yes. DNA should be patentable if changed. Someday soon, we are going to have designer babies. You'll donate an egg and a sperm, and decide which genes you would like to be removed, which added, etc. This will be a GREAT advancement. Say goodbye to the monstrous practice of aborting babies for Down Syndrome or other genetic defects. you will be able to examine a list of your egg and sperm's genes, and select for the characteristics you want, just like people pick out baby names now. There is nothing wrong with this.
Now, selection of your own genes is one thing. Likely the only way this could be commercially viable is a patent on the gene insertation process. Selection of a series of "upgrades" would be the real driver on price and R&D here. The whole process of just selecting your own genes might not even make money, it would be the upsell on the patented "supergenes" that would actually make the register ring.
What a baby with sequences designed to increase immunity to various diseases? That will be $7,000 additional. "We do offer a package plan, if you add ImmunoBoost and SuperFocus, we'll throw in our patented PancreasPlus sequence which protects against diabetus with modern diets for only $1,500."
This would be a good thing, and the only way it would be possible is by allowing editing of the human genome, and patenting of modified gene sequencing.
So Scotus ruled in 2013 that you cannot patent the human genome, which at the time, was about 25% patented already (4,300 genes).
So now one must change DNA to be patentable.
Should you be able to patent DNA that might go into a human?
Yes. DNA should be patentable if changed. Someday soon, we are going to have designer babies. You'll donate an egg and a sperm, and decide which genes you would like to be removed, which added, etc. This will be a GREAT advancement. Say goodbye to the monstrous practice of aborting babies for Down Syndrome or other genetic defects. you will be able to examine a list of your egg and sperm's genes, and select for the characteristics you want, just like people pick out baby names now. There is nothing wrong with this.
Now, selection of your own genes is one thing. Likely the only way this could be commercially viable is a patent on the gene insertation process. Selection of a series of "upgrades" would be the real driver on price and R&D here. The whole process of just selecting your own genes might not even make money, it would be the upsell on the patented "supergenes" that would actually make the register ring.
What a baby with sequences designed to increase immunity to various diseases? That will be $7,000 additional. "We do offer a package plan, if you add ImmunoBoost and SuperFocus, we'll throw in our patented PancreasPlus sequence which protects against diabetus with modern diets for only $1,500."
This would be a good thing, and the only way it would be possible is by allowing editing of the human genome, and patenting of modified gene sequencing.
9
Posted on 12/19/17 at 1:20 pm to cokebottleag
quote:
Should you be able to patent DNA that might go into a human?
No. You can't patent what God has created.
Posted on 12/19/17 at 1:21 pm to cokebottleag
We need Human Genome Neutrality, NOW!
Posted on 12/19/17 at 1:22 pm to boogiewoogie1978
quote:Humans have been taking credit for God's work for a long time.
No. You can't patent what God has created.
Posted on 12/19/17 at 1:25 pm to cokebottleag
quote:
the Human Genome
Posted on 12/19/17 at 1:26 pm to cokebottleag
Wait... So does that mean I can genetically engineer the same woman... say on like 10 year intervals... and just trade the old model out for the new?
What a time to be alive.
What a time to be alive.
Posted on 12/19/17 at 1:32 pm to cokebottleag
quote:
Should you be able to patent DNA that might go into a human?
No
Posted on 12/19/17 at 1:35 pm to cokebottleag
Editing of the human genome should be banned.
1. If you are a Christian it is clearly wrong to attempt to edit what God has created in his own image.
2. If you are a materialistic atheist it is clearly wrong to edit the genetics of a species based on short term fads and a profit motive which can reduce its genetic diversity and thereby make it more susceptible to extinction.
There is no macro case to permit this to go on.
1. If you are a Christian it is clearly wrong to attempt to edit what God has created in his own image.
2. If you are a materialistic atheist it is clearly wrong to edit the genetics of a species based on short term fads and a profit motive which can reduce its genetic diversity and thereby make it more susceptible to extinction.
There is no macro case to permit this to go on.
Posted on 12/19/17 at 1:35 pm to cokebottleag
quote:
Should you be able to patent DNA that might go into a human?
Yes. DNA should be patentable if changed. Someday soon, we are going to have designer babies. You'll donate an egg and a sperm, and decide which genes you would like to be removed, which added, etc. This will be a GREAT advancement. Say goodbye to the monstrous practice of aborting babies for Down Syndrome or other genetic defects. you will be able to examine a list of your egg and sperm's genes, and select for the characteristics you want, just like people pick out baby names now. There is nothing wrong with this.
Lost in your assumption is the idea that everyone will be able to afford this. Or perhaps you are assuming a massive growth in govt services?
Both Brave New World and Gattaca forsaw your scenario. Its not a good idea.
Posted on 12/19/17 at 1:43 pm to Boatshoes
quote:
2. If you are a materialistic atheist it is clearly wrong to edit the genetics of a species based on short term fads and a profit motive which can reduce its genetic diversity and thereby make it more susceptible to extinction
What?
Posted on 12/19/17 at 1:45 pm to Boatshoes
quote:
1. If you are a Christian it is clearly wrong to attempt to edit what God has created in his own image.
The bible is not clear at all if that image is a physical one or a spiritual image. No one is suggesting we could edit a person's soul.
quote:
2. If you are a materialistic atheist it is clearly wrong to edit the genetics of a species based on short term fads and a profit motive which can reduce its genetic diversity and thereby make it more susceptible to extinction.
100% of humans have genes for 2 eyes. 100% of humans have genes to create a heart. Yet these are not leading us to extinction.
Posted on 12/19/17 at 1:47 pm to NYNolaguy1
quote:
Lost in your assumption is the idea that everyone will be able to afford this. Or perhaps you are assuming a massive growth in govt services?
Both Brave New World and Gattaca forsaw your scenario. Its not a good idea.
Of course everyone can't afford it. Not everyone can afford tutoring and dance classes either, yet we allow them.
And basing our ideas of what we should and should not do on movies like Gattica seems silly. Should we base our policies on the environment off of Day After Tomorrow?
Posted on 12/19/17 at 1:52 pm to cokebottleag
quote:
naturally occuring
new sequences
a distinction which will be meaningless (not to mention lost) within a few years
Posted on 12/19/17 at 1:55 pm to boogiewoogie1978
quote:
No. You can't patent what God has created.
Hmmm. So what exist that God did not create?
Merry Christmas, bw.
Posted on 12/19/17 at 1:57 pm to Boatshoes
quote:
Editing of the human genome should be banned.
said the horse-buggy drivers to Henry Ford
quote:
1. If you are a Christian it is clearly wrong to attempt to edit what God has created in his own image.
I am a Christian, and if I could change my genes to not form plaque in my arteries, I would do it in a second. My God would want this.
quote:
2. If you are a materialistic atheist it is clearly wrong to edit the genetics of a species based on short term fads and a profit motive which can reduce its genetic diversity and thereby make it more susceptible to extinction.
you lost me here - health, longevity, beauty, intelligence are not "short term fads"
to meaningfully limit intraspecies diversity would take a massive purposeful effort, likely enacted by a government, not to mention dozens of generations of horrifying human rights abuse. Do you think thats likely in America?
Posted on 12/19/17 at 1:57 pm to cokebottleag
quote:
Should we base our policies on the environment off of Day After Tomorrow?
Actually Brave New World was a book by Aldous Huxley in 1932....
My point is this is a terrible idea besides what books or movies exist.
What right do you have as a conservative against abortion to permanently modify the genome of the unborn?
Why is killing an unborn infant not ok, but possibly fundamentally changing them for life through genomic error (or even success) acceptable to some?
How can someone unborn give consent to change that persons dna, lineage, and all following ancestry permenantly?
This post was edited on 12/19/17 at 1:59 pm
Posted on 12/19/17 at 2:01 pm to NYNolaguy1
quote:
How can someone unborn give consent to change that persons dna,
why do you love painful and disabling genetic diseases?
Posted on 12/19/17 at 2:02 pm to cokebottleag
Hopefully they can treat the obesity gene
Posted on 12/19/17 at 2:05 pm to TigerRad
quote:
why do you love painful and disabling genetic diseases?
Why do you love experimenting on unborn babies that cant tell you no?
Posted on 12/19/17 at 2:05 pm to NYNolaguy1
quote:
Both Brave New World and Gattaca forsaw your scenario. Its not a good idea.
That was one seriously disturbing movie in the nature of what it covered, as opposed to something like Saw.
Yet it didn't do too well at the box office, and almost no one has the slightest idea of what it was about.
quote:
Lost in your assumption is the idea that everyone will be able to afford this. Or perhaps you are assuming a massive growth in govt services?
You really think genetic engineering won't be dirt cheap in the long run? Not talking about avoiding genetic conditions that are expensive to treat, just the mechanics of the whole thing. I think prices will drop in a manner similar to DNA sequencing. Used to have human genome projects, now we have 23andme.
Page 1 of 2
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News