Outline the major arguments for and against the idea of patenting genes
What will be an ideal response?
Patents are not granted for products of nature, meaning that genes inside the body are not patentable. However, biotech companies have successfully argued that by removing a gene from the human body, purifying it, and then obtaining its DNA sequence, they have created something not found in nature, and which is therefore a patentable invention. Opponents argue that genes are parts of our bodies and can be identified but not invented. Biotech companies argue that without the protection offered by patents, they would have no incentive for research and development of diagnostic tests.
You might also like to view...
Lateral roots arise from the ____
a. endodermis b. root cap c. quiescent center d. pericycle e. root hairs
A patient arrives at the hospital by ambulance, presenting symptoms of confusion, partial paralysis, and slurred speech. The attending physician quickly diagnoses a stroke as the most likely cause and injects the patient with tissue plasminogen activator (tPA) to dissolve the clots, but the patient’s symptoms continue to deteriorate over the next few minutes. What is the most likely explanation for the patient’s failure to respond to treatment?
a. The patient has chronic epilepsy and has been misdiagnosed. b. Multiple clots caused the stroke, and another dose of tPA is required. c. The stroke occurred due to a burst blood vessel instead of a clot. d. A stroke cannot be treated by tPA once paralysis has occurred.
Could two phenotypically normal parents have a child with cystic fibrosis?
a. Yes b. No
An atom becomes a cation if:
a. it gains one or more electron. b. it loses one or more electron. c. it shares electrons. d. one or more of its electrons changes energy levels. e. it emits radiation.