DNA Rights and Wrongs
|
TOOLBOX
   Resize
COMMENT
 Discussion Policy
 CLOSE
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
Who's Blogging  |
Regarding the Sept. 4 front-page article "Mom's Genes or Dad's? Map Can Tell," about the unraveling of the Venter "diploid" genome:
The article noted that sequencing an individual's DNA provides a wealth of information not only about that person but also about his or her relations. But it did not mention that sequencing also provides information about all of an individual's unborn descendants. Thus, when an individual's genome sequence is publicly released, consent implicitly is being given for these unborn descendants without their approval.
Fifty years from now, our understanding of genomic information will undoubtedly be more sophisticated than it is today. In the future, from a bit of sequence, it might be possible to glean a tremendous amount about such things as the diseases or behavioral anomalies that might befall someone. What might these unborn descendants have to say about the release of such highly personal information?
It is worth underscoring that when information is publicly released, it gets widely distributed (via the Internet and other means); any such decision made today will have far-reaching and irreversible consequences.
MARK GERSTEIN
New Haven, Conn.
?
The only reason we can tell that J. Craig Venter has a gene that may cause his asthma and skin cancer is that no patent restricts access to it.
Unfortunately, that is not true of all genes. Patents have been granted for many human genes, and most of those patented genes are linked with disease.
The problem with patenting human genetic material is that to examine DNA, you might be required to pay royalties to those who have decoded your genes first. This hampers disease diagnosis and treatment research.
Fortunately, Congress is moving toward amending this situation.
Rep. Xavier Becerra (D-Calif.) introduced the Genomic Research and Accessibility Act of 2007 (H.R. 977) to prevent future patenting of human genetic material. This crucial bill would protect individuals' rights to their own DNA. It awaits action in the House Judiciary Committee.
GILLIAN K. MADILL
Genetic Technologies Campaigner
Friends of the Earth
Washington
