Patented DNA: An Ethical Issue

Case Study - Background

In the United States, if someone needs to have a DNA test done, there is a possibility that it has been patented by a DNA research company. The problem with this is that it can raise the cost of a DNA test from about two hundred dollars, to over two thousand, depending on the test being done. Up to forty-one percent of the genes in your body are actually owned by another company, and are not legally owned by yourself. In particular, Myriad Genetics holds a patent in the BRCA1 and the BRCA2 gene, also owning at least fifteen nucleotides of BRCA1. The owning of these genes is significant because a defective BRCA1 gene can make one much more likely to develop breast or ovarian cancer, up to an eighty five or ninety percent chance. In addition, the BRCA1 gene appears in over 689 other genes that affect many other parts of the body such as brain and heart function. These genes were patented by Myriad in the 90s, shortly after their ability to be patented. When a doctor takes blood from a patient, immediately after it is drawn, Myriad owns it, and it must be sent to them for testing. The problem with patenting DNA is that technically speaking, you don’t “own” part of your own body, the genetic code that makes up who you are; rather a company does, and controls what is done with it and how it is tested. Biological patents are not limited to humans, they extend to the cattle industry, which leads to another problem in itself, the genetic engineering of cows and other animals.

The ones who would be in favor of DNA patents would be research and pharmaceutical companies. The main reason why gene patents would be supported would be the fact that they let these companies earn money, and in exchange, they put their re...

... middle of paper ...

...entions cannot be accounted for, and the true intentions are shed through the light.

When coming to a conclusion that Kant would have, using categorical imperatives can be very helpful in the determination of the outcome. Categorical imperatives are moral rules that must be followed by everyone, or “universal laws,” according to Kant. Using this reasoning, if Myriad Genetics were on the side of someone who may have cancer and needs to have a test, then how would they feel to that? They would have to pay out of pocket as well, as insurance does not cover this analysis. When situations are looked at from the other side’s perspective, the validity of an action can completely be eliminated. Based on this reasoning, Kant would propose to make it illegal to patent any genes in the human body, or anything in the human body for that matter.

Case Study – Catholic Ethics