Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsHow Our Genetic Maps Are Being Sold to the Highest Bidder
http://www.thenation.com/article/168261/how-our-genetic-maps-are-being-sold-highest-bidderWho owns our bodies? One of the weirder cases exploring this bioethical question involved South Carolinian John Wood, whose leg was amputated after an airplane crash in 2004. Wanting to be buried whole eventually, he had the leg embalmed and placed it in a storage unit with other belongings. But he fell behind on the rental fees, and the contents of the unit were sold to one Shannon Whisnant, who found the leg carefully wrapped and nestled inside a barbecue smoker. Whisnant called the police, who traced it back to Wood. Wood insisted the leg be returned given his sincere belief that, detached or not, it was part of him. Whisnant, however, claimed that he was the purchaser-for-value and hoped to put the leg on display and charge a hefty price for the viewing. Halloweens just around the corner, he explained.
The ghoulishness of this situation should not obscure the legal issues at stake: should a commodity interest in the contents of the storage unit trump the sacrosanctity of corporeal integrity? Are discarded body parts alienable? Or do they fall in the realm of what we deem constitutionally inalienable? A devastating disease.
What about DNA? Suppose we assumed that Woods genetic makeup included cells that were resistant to AIDS. Do Wood or Whisnant have any proprietary claim to profits to be derived from the extraction, culture and sale of those cells? Could Whisnant not only display the leg but also publish Woodss entire genome as part of his Halloween show? Could the police officer to whom Whisnant brought the leg do a DNA test, retain the sample, patent a method of assaying the extracted data and ultimately market a pharmaceutical byproduct to patients at $5,000 a dose? We all leave a trail of hair and hangnails wherever we gounder what circumstances should that material be regarded as discarded and thus open for exploitation by finders-as-keepers?
At the end of May the personal genetics company 23andMe announced that it had procured its first patent, for Polymorphisms Associated With Parkinsons Disease. Patents create exclusionary rights in knowledge; they prohibit nonpatent holders from using that knowledge without permission or the payment of royalties. 23andMes patent stems from massive aggregations of data culled from customers who have paid considerable money for information about their genetic predispositions for various health risks. While 23andMes consumer contract says that no research on submitted spit samples shall be done without consent, many customers seem not to realize that research is defined as purely academicwhich is to say, work published in peer-reviewed scientific journals. The contract then distinguishes research from research and development (R&D) of commercial productsfor which no consent is needed.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
2 replies, 971 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (7)
ReplyReply to this post
2 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
How Our Genetic Maps Are Being Sold to the Highest Bidder (Original Post)
xchrom
Jun 2012
OP
"and hoped to put the leg on display and charge a hefty price for the viewing"
Heywood J
Jun 2012
#2
RC
(25,592 posts)1. That leg still belongs to John Wood. He grew it. He has genetic proof it is his.
It needs to be returned to him.
We are such a cold calculating country. Money is our national god. Death and destruction is our national past time.
If it bleeds, it is safe for the children's hour. Unless of course they are pictures from one of our many war zones.
Heywood J
(2,515 posts)2. "and hoped to put the leg on display and charge a hefty price for the viewing"
Wouldn't that be considered along the lines of indignity to a dead body or human remains? At the very least, it would seem morally repugnant to say "I have your leg and you can't have it back!" and it's practically begging to be sued, which would negate any profits from display.