I’m reading a book called “Next” by Michael Crichton. I’m not quite done with it yet, but an interesting dilemma has come about, that I think we will be seeing in the courts within the next several years. So here is the dilemma in the book. A guy has a genetic abnormality that essentially allows his body to fight cancer more efficiently than any pharmaceutical available. The said person is is asked by his doctor to keep coming in for blood work. He eventually finds out that his doctor has been selling his DNA to the highest paying Genetics research company. The research company has put a patten on this man’s DNA. So naturally, there is a big court case, because the man wants the rights to his own DNA. The judge rules that the man has no rights to his own DNA because it was deemed as bio-waste. The ruling is that all bio-related materials extracted from a person are excluded from their right to property, and therefore it is legal for the Genetic research company to patten the said man’s DNA.
I think this is something that is plausible for the future, and worth thinking about. Do we have rights to our own DNA if we have an abnormality that can be researched to benefit others? I tend to think that we do have rights to our own DNA. However, I would hope that if we did have a beneficial abnormality we would try to let others research it to help all. I’m curious know what other people think about this. Send me some feedback. =D
