November 8, 2011 • 41 mins
Should a company be able to own the rights to something found inside your own body? In this episode, Chuck and Josh delve into the complicated, controversial world of gene patents. Tune in to learn more about the history -- and future -- of gene patents.
Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.com
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Brought to you by the reinvented two thousand twelve camera.
It's ready. Are you welcome to stuff you should know
from House toff works dot Com. Hey, and welcome to
the podcast. I'm Josh Clark. There's Charles W. Chuck Bryant.
(00:21):
This is William Shatner. You have the sound of a
man who sounds like he's leaving town. I do. It
is a weekend. Yeah, I'm leaving town too. Nice are
you going? I'm going to see my sister and my
two nieces. My brother in law is not there, but
in Jacksonville, North Carolina. Very nice at the U. S.
(00:45):
Marine Corps bas very nice. You're gonna go to the
p X Campbell of June. I think, uh, sure, I'll
go to the p X. Should get some stuff there.
It's all like in a military discount some TAMO and
m O. Just walk like you're supposed to be in there,
you know, maybe make eye contact with everybody, try to
wither him and they'll be like, oh, he's a soldier.
(01:07):
I always stand out like a swart thomb on the
military basis. You're like, this is a fat, hairy guy. Yeah,
why is he here? And should I kill him, So
you're excited. Yeah, I haven't seen my sister in a while.
What about you? What you got going on? Uh? We
are going to New York, you me and I. Um
for friends wedding. Two friends wedding, two male friends wedding. Yeah,
(01:31):
awesome and it's official now. Congratulations to those guys. Yeah,
Mitch and Patrick, who are friends on the Facebook page,
tried to help them out. They were like in a
contest for crighton barrel wedding two steaks. Yeah, and a
lot of people showed up and bumped them from like
number twenty something. They're like number one for a little
while and then they just got crushed. So hats off
(01:53):
to everybody on our Facebook page who helped them out.
They are very grateful and to them. Yes me, best
wishes from stuff you should know from Mitch Patrick. Absolutely. Okay,
So Chuck, you want to get down to this, Yes,
how Jeane Simmons works Origen shall it Jene Cisco Gene
(02:15):
croupa well and with gene Gene pattents really is what
we're talking about, right, So it's interesting, I have I agree,
interesting and terrifying. Um. And by the way, I just
want to go ahead and say that there is a
documentary companion documentary that's required viewing for this one. It's
called The Corporation. Uh, if you have Netflix, it's streaming
(02:38):
on Netflix. You can also order the DVD or whatever.
But you could watch it literally right the second. It's
probably all over YouTube too. It's like one of those docs,
very well made, good stuff. It touches on a lot
of stuff in here and just goes into greater depth.
So I say, check out The Corporation. It's a good
documentary either way. Um. But uh, let me let me
(03:00):
give you a little story here. There is a condition.
It can be congenital. It can actually be acquired strangely enough,
although I didn't find out how. But it's called UM
growth hormone deficiency, right, okay, And basically it just means
that you are short, you're smaller in stature UM then
(03:20):
is average. Maybe you're smaller than the rest of your
family members, who knows, but the the point is that
your pituitary glands aren't producing enough growth hormone. Like manuel Lewis,
I imagine that he has some sort of growth hormone deficiency.
I think it's an umbrella term, but yes, UM, the
good thing is that it's treatable, and it's been treatable
(03:42):
for a while. And we knew for a very long
time where to get the treatment, where to get human
growth hormone, and that was extracting it from the pituitary
glands of cadavers. Up until the seventies, if you had
growth hormone deficiency and you were given injections, the stuff
they were in acting you with was extracted from cadaver's
(04:02):
pituitary glands. But it was still good to go. It was.
It worked, yeah, um, but it was very very expensive.
I mean, the extraction process, getting your hands on a
dead body. I mean, there's a lot of factors involved. Uh.
And then in in the until the nineteen eighties when
a company called Novo Nordisk got a patent for a
(04:23):
product called nano nanor one nano one. Yeah, it's just
a mouthful that it had created in the nineteen seventy three,
but it didn't get a patent until nineteen two. Couldn't
they just call it go juice? Yeah, you know, or
grow juice that be that would be much more appropriate, right, Okay,
we'll figure that out later. So the history to me
it was is one of the most interesting parts here.
(04:45):
And we'll get to nineteen eight two, which was a
landmark here in this field. But let's back up, Josh, Yes,
let's use the way back machine because we haven't done that. Now,
there's a cob women here there. It's musty. Uh. He's
been eating cheese too. You know. There's like rappers here
process cheese. Interesting. Uh, So let's go back in time.
(05:06):
There were three three rulings over the years, starting in
eighteen fifty three that sort of lead to what we're
talking about, but they weren't consistent. They sort of flip
flopped on the subject. Uh. In eighteen fifty three, Robert
Morse of the Telegraph fame was initially denied his patent
because part of it involved electromagnetism, a key part of it,
(05:27):
and they said he can't fatten electromagnetism. No, why, silly boy,
Because it's a principle of nature. Right. It's like, uh,
my device uses that cloud right there, so I'm gonna
patent that cloud. Like you can't patent a cloud. Well,
what about the process that makes clouds? No, you can't.
It's nature, that's natural. You can't patent nature. And this
(05:48):
is back when the U. S. Patent Office was the
god fearing US Patent Office and they knew what to
issue patents for and whatnot to not the crazy cuckoo
mixed up patent office of today. That's right where you
can patent thoughts and dreams. I'm patenting you chuck actually
on that already and you owe me to indollars for
(06:09):
you and saying that, uh so. Following that the second
ruling in nineteen twelve, another court ruled that you could
patent adrenaline because it's a distilled type of adrenaline that
was treated in a lab outside the body and it
was different than the natural adrenaline inside the body. Then,
(06:29):
after World War Two, another ruling reversed it again in
the Supreme Supreme Court said, I'm sorry, you cannot patent
this mixture of bacteria that you're making in your lab
right even doesn't exist in nature. And this would later
become a real touchstone in this argument, like does this
exist in nature? Like that cloud right there? Uh you,
(06:53):
it's natural. You can't patent it, But could you patent
a process or a cloud that you could create in
the lab that nature doesn't produce? Him? Maybe isn't capable
of producing. That's where it gets Harry. Yeah. Another big
step forward was the Plant Patent Act of nineteen thirty
thanks to a dude to name Luther Burbank, which is
(07:14):
a pretty rocking name. I think that's my new hotel name,
Luther Burbank. It's pretty cool for a you know, early
twentieth century white dude. Uh. He was a botanist and
he created more than eight hundred strains and varieties of plants,
including the Shasta daisy, the fire poppy, and the white BlackBerry.
(07:34):
I'm a fan of the Shasta daisy. Yeah. Yeah, Well
you have Luther Burbank. Thank I see him wearing four
finger rings, that says luth Yeah. Uh so he was obviously,
uh you know, pretty inspired to create plants. And they said,
you know what, that's pretty neto that you can do
all this stuff, so you should be allowed to We're
(07:55):
gonna pass this Plant Act. But don't even try two
patent bacteria again. There's a problem with bacteria that the
court has always traditionally disallowed. Apparently they consider bacteria more
natural life than a hybrid plant. It's true because of
the next case and that plant, that plant patent act um. Really,
(08:20):
that's that is a big deal, even just beyond like
what we're talking about, and we'll get to that later,
like what effects that that has had? Yeah? Um. And
then there's also a Plant Protection Act of nineteen seventy
that also allowed patents as well, but again this allowed bacteria.
Bacteria keeps getting kicked around, kicked around, kicked around until right,
(08:45):
was that a Diamond v. Chakrabarty. Yes, Ananda Chakrabarty worked
for GE developed a bacterium that could break down crude
oil and said, hey, we should use this for oil spills.
Very useful, great idea. Uh, the Court of Customs and
Patent Appeals, I'm sorry, it was initially rejected. And then
(09:07):
the Customs and Patent Appeals office overturned that, saying that
the fact that it's alive has no significant purpose in
our patent office. Right. And also you left out that
that chucker body um created a bacteria that didn't exist
in nature. Oh, it was. It was brand new, it
was recombinant. He made it himself. That's pretty cool, yes,
(09:28):
but then the bacteria. Uh. The Supreme Court then argued
the case and in nineteen eighty Warren Burger wrote that
whoever invents, and this is very key moving forward, whoever
invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacturer,
or and this is the key, composition of matter or
any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent,
(09:50):
therefore subject to the blah blah blah blah blah if
some fact though, but composition matters the key three words there, Right,
There's a big difference between a product of nature or
a principle of nature and the composition of matter, which
could be anything from you know, using two types of
metal to create an alloy, or creating two types of
(10:13):
DNA to create yeah, something like insulin um. And by
the way, diamond and diamond v chakra body is diamond.
Was the the head of the patent's office. So when
you fought against it, yeah, he he sued him to
be like, no, yeah, this is this is wrong. When'd
you feel like you're in trouble if the if the
head of the patents office was suing you, like, it
(10:35):
just seems worse, you know. Buton and that changed everything.
Um within two years, the first patent for UM, the
first gene patent, what we would call a gene patent
UM was issued to the University of California. Yeah, for
UM a hormone engineered too. I guess for milk production,
(11:00):
I'm not sure. And it was involved in breast cancer treatment,
but I don't know exactly what it did. I got
you UM. And then the same year insulin was patented
We're comminentt insulin, which was huge also. So that was
the same year that Novo nor Disc got its patent
for um nannermant nan normandy, the human growth hormone product. Yeah,
(11:24):
so UM that really just kind of opened up the floodgate.
Chakra body changed everything, and that that shows up in
the corporation too. It's pretty interesting how they talked about
that UM and but really I guess as far as
gene patents go, the real moment when everything changed was
(11:45):
in the late nineties when this little known group at
the time popped up UH in the media and said, hey,
we're almost finished entirely mapping the human genome. And the
U S Patent Office workers went and there's a flood
of patent requests. Right, one was for Pandora radio. Wasn't
(12:09):
that based on that? The Music Genome project, what's it
I think so. I would imagine if that's what they
called it or inspired by it. UM. But yeah, everyone
lined up all the time. It's like, oh, pattent this patent.
That they'd be like, I heard about this GENO, want
to patent it. I want to pattent this one. And
so they were inundated with it. And so in two
thousand one, the US Patent and Trademark Office the US
(12:29):
p t O UM issued new guidelines saying, Okay, yes,
anybody can apply for a patent, but you have to
know what you're talking about. You have to know you
have to know what the gene does, or you have
to have come up with some process UM using this gene.
There's there's there. There has to be criteria everybody, everybody. Yeah,
there has to be criteria UM. And that definitely UM
(12:54):
allowed some of the high there was a high water
mark in the the tie ebbed a little bit, a
little bit. But currently I believe, which was the initial
stat there are three to five thousand human gene patents
right now in the US alone. Yeah, forty seven thousand
(13:16):
involving inventions like equipment involving genetic material or insulin is
another example. Yeah, that's an invention using genetic material. But
there are more than three million on file as applicants. Yeah,
like that impending shirt ye so um, and that's with
(13:36):
the the tide ebbing. I hope, I hope it's ebbing.
And just in the United States again, isn't it? Yeah,
in the United States, Um, and there's plenty in Europe
and Japan. It's basically Europe, Japan, and the US are
the leaders in issuing patents for this kind of stuff.
Like basically, if you want to push the rest of
(13:57):
the world around, you go get a patent at one
of one of these areas patent offices. So uh, well,
let's talk specifically about the US, right, Um, let's talk patents. Yeah,
if you want to get a patent, you have to
you have to meet some criteria. Um. It doesn't matter
what the patents for, whether it's for the dippie bird
(14:17):
or you know, for human growth hormone. Um. And so
for any any invention to get a patent to be
a proof for a patent, um it has to meet
for criteria. Right, has to be useful, it has to
be non obvious, right, Like it can't be a shoe string.
(14:38):
I don't know, I would have non what would an
obvious one be? A wonder an obvious invention would be
um man, I don't know. I'm just curious. Maybe using
peppermint too too, um fight bad breath? Maybe obvious. Yeah,
(15:00):
it's obvious. Anybody can do that. You can't patent that.
There you go, there's air non obvious example. Um. It
has to be novel, right, um. And it has to
meet the enablement criterion, which is a big deal. And
this is pretty much the whole reason patents exist. One
of the big reasons. It's got to have detail. It
can't be just a big, broad, esoteric thing. It's got
(15:21):
to be detailed enough where someone in that field can
figure it out and use it, right, And this is
this is one of the major reasons the patent office exists.
It's to say, Okay, thank you for sharing your findings
with the rest of the world. We're gonna give you
twenty years of exclusivity. But in return, you're you're being
totally transparent. Here's all of the processes, here's all the notes,
(15:44):
here's anything that anybody working in your field can can
look at and use to build upon your research, or
they pay you well, but can they get it and
change it enough to where it doesn't You can't. And
those are called patent trolls and a only they're a
big problem right now. They're they're towarding technology. I think
tech stuff did something on patent trolls recently. Interesting. Yeah. Um,
(16:08):
so you if you are issued a patent, you get
twenty years of exclusivity. Nobody can use it, uh um,
market it, sell it anything as you do with your
invention or process unless they pay you. They have to
go through you, and you license it and reap the benefits, right, Yeah.
And the reason it was such a mad rush when
the genome project was first completed because obviously the first
(16:31):
person to invent something gets the patent. So if you
can prove that, then that's yours for twenty years. So
well that's based on the first to invent principle. Yeah,
right exactly, So you have to prove that and then
after that you've got it for twenty years. And everyone
was in a big rush to be the first with
these gene patents. Have you heard the story of um
(16:51):
Alexander Graham Bell and Elijah what was his name? Do
you mean? The real guy? He would invented the telephone? Yeah,
what's his name? Oh? Was that the case? I knew
there was some stink there, but I wasn't sure. Um,
Elijah Gray. Apparently Elijah Gray invented a telephone that looked
and worked way way more like the ones we used today,
(17:15):
I should say, the ones we used in the used
in the seventies and eighties. Right. It wasn't stealth phone,
but you know, the kind of rotary dial all that. Um.
But Alexander Graham Bell beat him to the patent office
and um, now did he steal his ideas? Or was
it just confirms independent? Um? And I can't remember what
that's called. But there's there's there's an idea that, like
(17:37):
you know, oh the zeitgeist, we're all, you know, ideas
kind of float out there for anybody to latch onto,
and sometimes people do independently. I wonder how far apart
they were from each other and being completed, And like
I wonder if it was literally literally like my horse
fell sick that day and I couldn't make it to
the office. Um, but did I don't remember how how
close it was, but it was pretty close. Um. So Uh,
(18:01):
the Patent office has this first to invent principle where
it's not necessarily like who beat who to the patent office.
It's if you have a situation like that, who's been
working on this longer or who reached a landmark longer,
and then that's who gets the patent. That's why there
was like you said that mad rush, because you know,
it's like I noticed this first, so let me go
(18:24):
ahead and get my patent in well. And with the
case of like insulin or any of any of these
gene patents, really you can't just say like, oh, I
got this thing like you. They have to have it
on file, which is something I never knew. There are
twenty six culture depositories around the world thanks to and
this is such a mouthful, thanks to the Budapest Treaty
(18:44):
on the International Recognition of the deposit of Microorganisms for
the purpose of Patent Procedure. So basically, it's like a
repository where you send in your sample, right, and that
the way I understand it, um, And there's twenty six
of them worldwide, right, Yeah. And if it is a
a product of if it's something you remove from from
(19:05):
the body and processed, the patent only applies to the
very end result that you send in, not like the
little stages along the way, although you can patent that
those stages, Yeah, but they just have to be independent
of one another, right yeah, alright. So, um, you've you've
submitted your sample to a depository, you have applied for
(19:27):
the patent, it's been issued. You're good to go. Um,
what are you patenting? Right? Like, I think there's a
huge misunderstanding among the public that you're walking around and
the some company owns the the rights to your genes. True? False? False?
(19:50):
That is false. I mean the gene patent is kind
of a misnomer. It's a pretty big misnomer actually, because
there's certain criteria that have to be met. Like you,
you you have natural Um what is it natural matter? Um?
Is it is that always called? Or something of nature?
Composition of nature? Genes are a composition of nature in
(20:12):
your body. To patent something, you have to extract genes
and get them to do like, you know, jump through
a flaming hoop outside of the body. Then you have
something called composition of matter. Right. Um, So what are
some of the things that people are getting gene patents for? Well,
it breaks down, my friend, into four categories pretty much. Uh,
(20:34):
you won't go one at a time. Yeah, for a change. Diagnostics,
that means, uh, they're looking to patent a method. Basically
generally it tests for genetic differences, abnormalities, uh, spotting genetic
markers and cancer, alzheim or stuff like that. Right, pretty
nice way to use your time, I think it is.
(20:56):
But it's also very controversial. As we'll see in a
little bit this not all of it is, but three
of the four are, right. And with diagnostics, what you're
patenting is in fact the gene that you're looking at
or the genes involved, and the um the mutations. Right,
so you have a bunch of different possible mutations, right,
(21:18):
but a very sharp company. And by the way, by
saying you need to know what you're talking about or
you need to have put some sort of UM research
into this basically excluded schmos like you and I from
getting gene patents. And just said, huge laboratories, huge corporations
are the only ones who can possibly get gene patents now. Um,
so if you have a very sharp laboratory or very
(21:39):
sharp corporation, they're gonna have a patent for every possible
mutation for a specific gene and then ultimately what they're
patenting is the screening process. The test hit exactly used
to evaluate these mutations. So that's number one. UH functional
uses the second that is pretty much just discovering roles
(22:00):
played by genes. Uh. They're usually issued for drugs that
affect the functioning of the genes. Yeah, so I guess
insulin would be that. Uh No, insulin is composition of matter.
So functional, we understand that this mutation on this gene
causes this to happen. So we're going to create a
(22:20):
drug that makes the gene act normally, expressed normally something
like that, And that's the that's the future of UM
pharmaceuticals is genetically tailored drugs because right now, when you
take a drug right Thailand all or something, you're just
throwing something in the in the wind and hoping it works. Right,
(22:41):
genetically tailor drugs, it's like, look at your genetic composition
and then say, well, this is the drug you need
and it will work at the time and it will
work effectively. Dollars, please make it check out. UH process
is the third type of patent in this category, and
that's pretty easy. That's basically protecting a method by which
(23:05):
the genes are extracted or manipulated. And it's the least
controversial out of all these because it's not it's a
more traditional kind of patent, right, This is like science. Yeah,
and then you have composition of matter. That's yeah, composition
of matter and diagnostics are the two most controversial. And
composition of matter is like human growth hormone insulin stuff
(23:28):
that saves lives. Um and but it's an invention quote
unquote it is, I mean like creating human growth hormone
using E. Coal i to string together amino acids. That's
an invention and hats off to you. So what's what's
the controversy? What's the problem with gene patents with it's
(23:49):
issuing twenty years of exclusivity to somebody who you know,
teaches the coal i to string together amino acids. Well,
there's a couple of different controversies, one the ethical and
social and economic, the others the legal. As far as
legal goes, if you're against it, you're gonna argue that, dude,
(24:09):
these are your genes. There is nothing more natural than
the genes in your body, So of course you can't
patent them. And it doesn't matter what you do to them,
like it's still based on this product of nature. That
just leave it alone, Like this should be this, This
is the heritage of humankind. It's us, it's what makes
us us. Of course, we shouldn't be issuing patents to
(24:31):
corporations on genes, say, say the critics of gene pat
right proponents would say, hey, dude, if we can extract
this from the body and manipulate it many times to
the point where it's not even the same as before,
then of course you should be able to patent that right.
And and that's one of the reasons why we have
patents is to reward innovation, to reward very smart people,
(24:53):
and to encourage more innovation and research and things that
save lives, like so you don't have to extract growth
formon from the pituitary glance of the dead um myriad genetics.
Should we talk about that. It's a good example. This
is a big one. Uh. They filed seven patents relating
to h r C A one and b r C
(25:13):
A two. Basically, what they developed was a test kit
for breast and ovarian cancer. Right, and these these two
um genes account for I think, like of breast de
ovarian cancer, I think breast cancer. So it's pretty substantial.
And uh, Myriad got a patent on the screening kit
(25:33):
that they created, and they promptly turned around and sent
letters to just about every cancer screening laboratory in the
world right and said, hey, we're here that you guys
are saving people's lives. That's awesome. I think, keep up
the good work. Just make sure that you send all
of your cancer screening when it relates to these two
(25:53):
genes to us, and we'll do it, and we're going
to charge you for it. And throughout the world, people
in laboratories through these letters up in the air and
and clucked their tongues and stroked their beards and anger
and strutted about their flasks and and in Canada it
was just overtly ignored. The Canadian government itself stepped and
(26:14):
it was like, you don't need to listen to these crackpots. Um.
In Europe it was very controversial. I think it's largely ignored.
So it's upheld I think in the US because this
was the country that issued the patent, But elsewhere they're like,
we're not listening to you. And for a long time,
Myriad didn't do anything. There wasn't any lawsuits. Uh, and
(26:34):
then there was one, and in two thousand and ten
the company, um, yeah, Well the U. S. District Court said,
now we're not We're not going to support this. And
then in two thousand eleven Court of Appeal for the
Federal Circuit overturned that lower court's decision, so it went
up one step higher and Myriad got satisfaction. They got
(26:55):
Myriad satisfaction. Yeah, you know that means thirty tho. It's
an actual number, Myriad. Yeah, just like decimated as ten.
But this is one that I'm I'm on the side
of the people using it correctly because I can't stand
it when someone says like I had a myriad of yeah,
when it's supposed to be just myriad, I had thirty
(27:17):
thousand costs. See that's where I disagree with the thirty
thou part, Like, say it correctly, but come on, or
you could just say like I had a myriad of
costs and then wink afterywere like, I don't want to
talking about him, just pull my finger. So the Myriad
case continues. I did I did, like when it was
(27:38):
initially ruled against the ruling judge. He sounded really like
a who was Andy Griffith's judge character or no lawyer character,
Matt Luck it's a that's a lawyer's trick. That's what
he called it. And then they Supreme Court said, no,
it's not a trick. They modified it, your honor. I
don't know spit about lawyer, but do know the human heart.
(28:01):
I never saw that show. I didn't either, but there
was a good Senenate live send up of it. Of course,
still Hartman did r I P. Phil Hartman. So ethical
social challenges and controversies, this is where it gets hot. Yeah,
and I guess we should say, like we just kind
of left it, like myrroads up in the air. That's
(28:22):
the standard for what's going on in the US right
now as far as gene pattents go. And that was
just a few months ago. The Pattent Office is honoring
its obligations, and then the courts are people are suing people,
and the courts are just going all over the place.
So it's just totally up in the air whether or
not this is going to be allowed or what kind
of standards will eventually adopt the heat of this. Yeah,
(28:44):
we are so yeah, let's talk about ethical the ethics
of this, right yeah. I mean it's sort of along
the same lines in a way as the legal challenges,
because proponents are gonna say, you know this, this is
great for research. If you don't, if you don't allow this,
then companies aren't gonna be able to make a profit
(29:06):
from this. So there's going to be no incentive if
to to continue this kind of research. Reacharch is gonna stop.
And this research is important. Like you can say what
you will about Myriad, but they're screening test saves lives
and if they invented it, then this sort of breaks
down almost into private sector capitalism versus because if the
(29:27):
private sector dried up because they couldn't make any money
off this stuff, all the research would be left to
government funded laboratories. Right. It's it's very much divided among
capitalists socialist lines, and I think though that people who
normally wouldn't consider themselves socialists are falling into the critics
camp just from the just the idea of you know,
(29:50):
having gene patents out there. It's it is something that
I think a lot of people think should just belong
to all humankind. But the the free market proponents do
may a pretty good case. You know, if that if
you don't reward innovation and invention and clever yeah the
(30:12):
techniques monetarily, then you have a problem. On the other side, though,
you can say, well, you're also issuing monopolies on things
that like our life saving that a company can charge
whatever they want, Like what will you pay to find
out you know whether you have cancer? Or what will
you pay for a drug that will get rid of
(30:34):
your cancer, Chuck Bryant, Because we know your genetic makeup
and we know that this will work perfectly with your
genetic makeup. How much will you pay for that? And
we're the only company you can get it from. I'd
pay everything I had. Yes, you would know, and so
would you know every other person who had the same
similar genetic makeup as you, which is problematic. And also
(30:56):
if it if it, here's your cancer, but the three
weeks later your head explodes, but it doesn't happen in everybody.
That company has zero incentive to make its product so
that it doesn't make you know, the thirty percent of
people's heads explode because it has a monopoly. What are
you gonna do? You're still gonna buy this thing. Right.
(31:17):
Another argument for is that at least what this process
does is creates transparency and research. It's all out there.
Everybody knows there's people might not be wasting their time
duplicating research a and be uh people can build on
your research and it will propel it further into the future.
(31:38):
Should pretty good argument there. Yeah, but you can understand
why this is not a cut and dried argument. Well,
the A m A says we know, like, yeah, the
A m A saying like that this won't help support
research for American Medical Association. It's saying that, um, it
will inhibit uh research on genetic disease and basically, even
(32:01):
worse than that, it will inhibit access for the average person.
So I want to give an example of what is
at stake here. Okay, so we've kind of seen like,
you know, this kind of this kind of reward does
propel innovation and research. Right, But there's this UM with
(32:22):
the Plant Act of UM that allowed people to genetically
modify plants Luther Burbank, Yeah, um and then get patents
for those. There's a company called Monsanto and Montsano came
up with this idea called UM Genetic Use Restriction technology.
It's UM also known as terminator technology, where they have
(32:44):
figured out how to insert a gene basically a suicide
gene into its seeds. It's genetically modified seeds right for
second seeds, yes, so for the first generation seed you
your plant just grow like normal, like a normal genetically
modified organism. It will produce seeds, but those seeds it
(33:07):
produces are sterile because it has a gene in it
that that won't allow it to produce seeds that can
be used again. This means that you have to go
to Monsano to buy their seeds. You can't hoard their
seeds and replant next year. Every year you have to
go and buy their seeds. This is fine and dandy
for very wealthy farmers in the West, but no matter
where you are in the world, if you want to
(33:29):
grow this you know UM cricket resistant type of wheat
that Monsano owns a patent on, you got to buy
it from Monsano and you have to buy it every
year wheter what you can afford or can't. And basically
there's a really good argument that you should not be
allowed to to own a patent a license on a
(33:50):
process as natural as a plant producing offspring producing seeds.
So that's one example that a lot of people point
to is like cautionary tale. Well, they for against gene pattons.
They did not, Monsanto did not. They still hold this.
They didn't release it and say this is what we're doing.
You know, they actually vowed to not do that. Yeah,
(34:11):
they said, we won't do it, but you've got to
sign this agreement if you do business with us, or
we'll start releasing this right, And the agreement says that
you won't reuse seeds that you get from their genetically
modified plants. And didn't they buy up the company that
was originally ah Delta and pine Land Company. They ended
up buying them up, didn't they? Yes, and they they
(34:34):
this company has said has vowed the opposite that they're
going to start using that terminator gene commercially. Oh they have. Yeah.
So a lot of people are very nervous about whether
or not that genetic use restriction technology will come into play.
But I mean it's already effectively in play. We should
do a Monsanto podcast that would be explosive, would be
(34:59):
very explosive. We will. So that's gene pattents. This is uh,
we haven't done one of these in a while. I'm
quite sure we're gonna hear from people on both sides
of this issue, and we want to. Yeah, I think
we did a good job this time of keeping our
own dirty laundry out of it. Yes, we did. Kudos
to you, buddy. And um so if you we have
a bunch of stuff on Jeanes and Gene Pattents on
(35:19):
how Stuff Works dot com, just type in Gene Pattents
that will bring up a lot of stuff, including a
quiz which you could say is maybe a compendium to this,
uh this episode. Who wrote this one? Uh, Michael Franco,
I don't Yeah, he does everything does um, But yeah,
it was a pretty good article. But just type in
(35:40):
Gene Patton said the search bar how stuff works dot Com. Also,
don't forget check out the corporation. Uh, it's just a
really interesting documentary. Um. And I said search bar in
there somewhere. So that means it's time for listener mail.
And this is the winning listener mail, is it? It's
the first one? Really? Yeah, promised a book to the
(36:03):
the The author of this email will receive a free
copy hardcover copy of John Hodgman's incredible book about the
end of the world. The third in this trilogy of
knowledge World Knowledge called That Is All, which just came
out of November one hof and you really should buy it. Yeah,
(36:24):
except for this person, John's a buddy and stuff. But
it's a very very fun book. Um all right, I
kind of forgot that when I picked this, but I
think this Turkish listener is is uh, he deserves it,
so yeah, we'll go with him, The Lucky Turk, The
Lucky Turk. Hey, guys, listening to you from Turkey. I
(36:45):
guess I gave that away. I really love the podcast.
Thanks a lot for what you're doing. This might sound
a bit like complaining, thought wait, wait, wait, I'd prefer
that I don't come across this complaining. And I don't
know if you even have any more listeners from Turkey,
But in various episodes, every time you mentioned Turkey, like
when somebody was stuck in Turkey on the last episode
(37:05):
where you were wondering if people can surf on the
boss for us Phosphorus Bosporus, it always kind of sounds
like you look down on Turkey a bit, to be honest. Untrue.
Now we we talked about being stuck in Turkey and
how awful that would be. That's I don't recall that
because I would love to go to Turkey sometimes. I
have a friend who played bass in the second most
(37:27):
popular Turkish rock band in the late nineties. Really yeah,
I don't remember the name of it, but PEPSI did
a poll of Turks and my friend's band came in
second and most popular was your friend Turkish. No, he
went to Turkey just for the heck of it and
ended up in the number two most popular rock band
in Turkey. That's probably not hard to do. See, that's
(37:49):
what this guy's talking about. It's you, Chuck, I'm getting
wrapped up in your problems, al right. Sorry to drag
you down. You guys seem to be a couple of
people who would like to know the facts. So I
just wanted to suggest you check out things like ohlu
Deniz Turkey, or maybe Fethaette Turkey or Bodrum Turkey in
Google images. I'm just saying, I don't think anyone wouldn't
(38:12):
mind being stuck in Turkey, really, if you really know
what Turkey was like, and I did look these places up, dude,
you know, gorgeous Turkey also arguably has the world's first city.
I can't remember what it's called, but it's just because
I felt like I have to say this since I'm
already writing an email. There is no surfing on the Bosphorus,
not even swimming on the Bosphorus. It's kind of dangerous.
(38:33):
Usually it's just bigger ships crossing country that use that,
and there are no beaches there. But Turkey is surrounded
on three sides by the sea, basically a peninsula, so
there's windsurfing, every kind of water sport you can think
of on the seaside cities. Uh. In the media, Turkey
comes across as if it was a dusty hut and
primitive country, which I think is what I had been saying,
(38:55):
and I should say. When I worked for my last company,
which was a chicken software company, one of our clients
was in Turkey and some of our guys would go
over there to the chicken farms and it was awful too.
They would come back saying, please God, don't ever send
me to Turkey again. They were in like the awful
part of Turkey. They were raising chickens and Turkey. Yeah, yeah,
(39:18):
I have to say that, though only some small cities
on the eastern edges are like that, guys. The people
in different clothes are more interesting than people to look
at who look like most of us, who look like
every other European country. So the media only reflects the
different part, kind of like only showing rednecks grilling steak
on a shopping cart I've never seen. I guess I'm
(39:41):
gonna the rest of Turkeys pretty much like California, great climate, people,
social and cultural, culturally, even especially Istanbul, it resembles a
very crowded San Francisco, not Constantinople, what with all the
hills and the bridges and the hipsters. So that is
from goes to ge z d E And dude, you're
(40:03):
getting a book. And I am sorry for bad mouthing
Turkey because I did look at pictures and it's nothing
at all like I thought. I'm not sorry for bad
mouthing Turkey because I didn't. I didn't and if I did,
I was totally joking. Then I feel like I owe
this guy book. Yeah, the only place in the world
I would never go is Detroit. I totally go to Turkey.
Detroit's awesome. So what's the name goest you get a book?
(40:26):
So you're gonna have to write back in Yeah, we
need your mailing address, goest to, and we should probably
make them, you know, pay the difference for international shipping. Well,
and it's Turkey. It probably just says goes to Turkey.
That's his name, because we'll just put a bunch of
stamps on it and throw it in the water exactly. Uh.
Goest to send us an email with your mailing address, UM,
(40:48):
because we really think there probably are more than one
of you in Turkey. Uh and uh to all the
rest of you. If we send an emails, UM, thank you.
We'll try to read them, but you get no books.
If you want to get in touch with us, you
can on Twitter, s y SK podcast, on Facebook, Facebook
dot com, slash stuff you Should Know, and via email
at stuff Podcast at how Stuff works dot com. Be
(41:19):
sure to check out our new video podcast, Stuff from
the Future. Join how Stuff Work staff as we explore
the most promising and perplexing possibilities of tomorrow, brought to
you by the reinvented two thousand twelve camera. It's ready,
are you
Brought to you by the reinvented two thousand twelve camera.
It's ready. Are you welcome to stuff you should know
from House toff works dot Com. Hey, and welcome to
the podcast. I'm Josh Clark. There's Charles W. Chuck Bryant.
(00:21):
This is William Shatner. You have the sound of a
man who sounds like he's leaving town. I do. It
is a weekend. Yeah, I'm leaving town too. Nice are
you going? I'm going to see my sister and my
two nieces. My brother in law is not there, but
in Jacksonville, North Carolina. Very nice at the U. S.
(00:45):
Marine Corps bas very nice. You're gonna go to the
p X Campbell of June. I think, uh, sure, I'll
go to the p X. Should get some stuff there.
It's all like in a military discount some TAMO and
m O. Just walk like you're supposed to be in there,
you know, maybe make eye contact with everybody, try to
wither him and they'll be like, oh, he's a soldier.
(01:07):
I always stand out like a swart thomb on the
military basis. You're like, this is a fat, hairy guy. Yeah,
why is he here? And should I kill him, So
you're excited. Yeah, I haven't seen my sister in a while.
What about you? What you got going on? Uh? We
are going to New York, you me and I. Um
for friends wedding. Two friends wedding, two male friends wedding. Yeah,
(01:31):
awesome and it's official now. Congratulations to those guys. Yeah,
Mitch and Patrick, who are friends on the Facebook page,
tried to help them out. They were like in a
contest for crighton barrel wedding two steaks. Yeah, and a
lot of people showed up and bumped them from like
number twenty something. They're like number one for a little
while and then they just got crushed. So hats off
(01:53):
to everybody on our Facebook page who helped them out.
They are very grateful and to them. Yes me, best
wishes from stuff you should know from Mitch Patrick. Absolutely. Okay,
So Chuck, you want to get down to this, Yes,
how Jeane Simmons works Origen shall it Jene Cisco Gene
(02:15):
croupa well and with gene Gene pattents really is what
we're talking about, right, So it's interesting, I have I agree,
interesting and terrifying. Um. And by the way, I just
want to go ahead and say that there is a
documentary companion documentary that's required viewing for this one. It's
called The Corporation. Uh, if you have Netflix, it's streaming
(02:38):
on Netflix. You can also order the DVD or whatever.
But you could watch it literally right the second. It's
probably all over YouTube too. It's like one of those docs,
very well made, good stuff. It touches on a lot
of stuff in here and just goes into greater depth.
So I say, check out The Corporation. It's a good
documentary either way. Um. But uh, let me let me
(03:00):
give you a little story here. There is a condition.
It can be congenital. It can actually be acquired strangely enough,
although I didn't find out how. But it's called UM
growth hormone deficiency, right, okay, And basically it just means
that you are short, you're smaller in stature UM then
(03:20):
is average. Maybe you're smaller than the rest of your
family members, who knows, but the the point is that
your pituitary glands aren't producing enough growth hormone. Like manuel Lewis,
I imagine that he has some sort of growth hormone deficiency.
I think it's an umbrella term, but yes, UM, the
good thing is that it's treatable, and it's been treatable
(03:42):
for a while. And we knew for a very long
time where to get the treatment, where to get human
growth hormone, and that was extracting it from the pituitary
glands of cadavers. Up until the seventies, if you had
growth hormone deficiency and you were given injections, the stuff
they were in acting you with was extracted from cadaver's
(04:02):
pituitary glands. But it was still good to go. It was.
It worked, yeah, um, but it was very very expensive.
I mean, the extraction process, getting your hands on a
dead body. I mean, there's a lot of factors involved. Uh.
And then in in the until the nineteen eighties when
a company called Novo Nordisk got a patent for a
(04:23):
product called nano nanor one nano one. Yeah, it's just
a mouthful that it had created in the nineteen seventy three,
but it didn't get a patent until nineteen two. Couldn't
they just call it go juice? Yeah, you know, or
grow juice that be that would be much more appropriate, right, Okay,
we'll figure that out later. So the history to me
it was is one of the most interesting parts here.
(04:45):
And we'll get to nineteen eight two, which was a
landmark here in this field. But let's back up, Josh, Yes,
let's use the way back machine because we haven't done that. Now,
there's a cob women here there. It's musty. Uh. He's
been eating cheese too. You know. There's like rappers here
process cheese. Interesting. Uh, So let's go back in time.
(05:06):
There were three three rulings over the years, starting in
eighteen fifty three that sort of lead to what we're
talking about, but they weren't consistent. They sort of flip
flopped on the subject. Uh. In eighteen fifty three, Robert
Morse of the Telegraph fame was initially denied his patent
because part of it involved electromagnetism, a key part of it,
(05:27):
and they said he can't fatten electromagnetism. No, why, silly boy,
Because it's a principle of nature. Right. It's like, uh,
my device uses that cloud right there, so I'm gonna
patent that cloud. Like you can't patent a cloud. Well,
what about the process that makes clouds? No, you can't.
It's nature, that's natural. You can't patent nature. And this
(05:48):
is back when the U. S. Patent Office was the
god fearing US Patent Office and they knew what to
issue patents for and whatnot to not the crazy cuckoo
mixed up patent office of today. That's right where you
can patent thoughts and dreams. I'm patenting you chuck actually
on that already and you owe me to indollars for
(06:09):
you and saying that, uh so. Following that the second
ruling in nineteen twelve, another court ruled that you could
patent adrenaline because it's a distilled type of adrenaline that
was treated in a lab outside the body and it
was different than the natural adrenaline inside the body. Then,
(06:29):
after World War Two, another ruling reversed it again in
the Supreme Supreme Court said, I'm sorry, you cannot patent
this mixture of bacteria that you're making in your lab
right even doesn't exist in nature. And this would later
become a real touchstone in this argument, like does this
exist in nature? Like that cloud right there? Uh you,
(06:53):
it's natural. You can't patent it, But could you patent
a process or a cloud that you could create in
the lab that nature doesn't produce? Him? Maybe isn't capable
of producing. That's where it gets Harry. Yeah. Another big
step forward was the Plant Patent Act of nineteen thirty
thanks to a dude to name Luther Burbank, which is
(07:14):
a pretty rocking name. I think that's my new hotel name,
Luther Burbank. It's pretty cool for a you know, early
twentieth century white dude. Uh. He was a botanist and
he created more than eight hundred strains and varieties of plants,
including the Shasta daisy, the fire poppy, and the white BlackBerry.
(07:34):
I'm a fan of the Shasta daisy. Yeah. Yeah, Well
you have Luther Burbank. Thank I see him wearing four
finger rings, that says luth Yeah. Uh so he was obviously,
uh you know, pretty inspired to create plants. And they said,
you know what, that's pretty neto that you can do
all this stuff, so you should be allowed to We're
(07:55):
gonna pass this Plant Act. But don't even try two
patent bacteria again. There's a problem with bacteria that the
court has always traditionally disallowed. Apparently they consider bacteria more
natural life than a hybrid plant. It's true because of
the next case and that plant, that plant patent act um. Really,
(08:20):
that's that is a big deal, even just beyond like
what we're talking about, and we'll get to that later,
like what effects that that has had? Yeah? Um. And
then there's also a Plant Protection Act of nineteen seventy
that also allowed patents as well, but again this allowed bacteria.
Bacteria keeps getting kicked around, kicked around, kicked around until right,
(08:45):
was that a Diamond v. Chakrabarty. Yes, Ananda Chakrabarty worked
for GE developed a bacterium that could break down crude
oil and said, hey, we should use this for oil spills.
Very useful, great idea. Uh, the Court of Customs and
Patent Appeals, I'm sorry, it was initially rejected. And then
(09:07):
the Customs and Patent Appeals office overturned that, saying that
the fact that it's alive has no significant purpose in
our patent office. Right. And also you left out that
that chucker body um created a bacteria that didn't exist
in nature. Oh, it was. It was brand new, it
was recombinant. He made it himself. That's pretty cool, yes,
(09:28):
but then the bacteria. Uh. The Supreme Court then argued
the case and in nineteen eighty Warren Burger wrote that
whoever invents, and this is very key moving forward, whoever
invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacturer,
or and this is the key, composition of matter or
any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent,
(09:50):
therefore subject to the blah blah blah blah blah if
some fact though, but composition matters the key three words there, Right,
There's a big difference between a product of nature or
a principle of nature and the composition of matter, which
could be anything from you know, using two types of
metal to create an alloy, or creating two types of
(10:13):
DNA to create yeah, something like insulin um. And by
the way, diamond and diamond v chakra body is diamond.
Was the the head of the patent's office. So when
you fought against it, yeah, he he sued him to
be like, no, yeah, this is this is wrong. When'd
you feel like you're in trouble if the if the
head of the patents office was suing you, like, it
(10:35):
just seems worse, you know. Buton and that changed everything.
Um within two years, the first patent for UM, the
first gene patent, what we would call a gene patent
UM was issued to the University of California. Yeah, for
UM a hormone engineered too. I guess for milk production,
(11:00):
I'm not sure. And it was involved in breast cancer treatment,
but I don't know exactly what it did. I got
you UM. And then the same year insulin was patented
We're comminentt insulin, which was huge also. So that was
the same year that Novo nor Disc got its patent
for um nannermant nan normandy, the human growth hormone product. Yeah,
(11:24):
so UM that really just kind of opened up the floodgate.
Chakra body changed everything, and that that shows up in
the corporation too. It's pretty interesting how they talked about
that UM and but really I guess as far as
gene patents go, the real moment when everything changed was
(11:45):
in the late nineties when this little known group at
the time popped up UH in the media and said, hey,
we're almost finished entirely mapping the human genome. And the
U S Patent Office workers went and there's a flood
of patent requests. Right, one was for Pandora radio. Wasn't
(12:09):
that based on that? The Music Genome project, what's it
I think so. I would imagine if that's what they
called it or inspired by it. UM. But yeah, everyone
lined up all the time. It's like, oh, pattent this patent.
That they'd be like, I heard about this GENO, want
to patent it. I want to pattent this one. And
so they were inundated with it. And so in two
thousand one, the US Patent and Trademark Office the US
(12:29):
p t O UM issued new guidelines saying, Okay, yes,
anybody can apply for a patent, but you have to
know what you're talking about. You have to know you
have to know what the gene does, or you have
to have come up with some process UM using this gene.
There's there's there. There has to be criteria everybody, everybody. Yeah,
there has to be criteria UM. And that definitely UM
(12:54):
allowed some of the high there was a high water
mark in the the tie ebbed a little bit, a
little bit. But currently I believe, which was the initial
stat there are three to five thousand human gene patents
right now in the US alone. Yeah, forty seven thousand
(13:16):
involving inventions like equipment involving genetic material or insulin is
another example. Yeah, that's an invention using genetic material. But
there are more than three million on file as applicants. Yeah,
like that impending shirt ye so um, and that's with
(13:36):
the the tide ebbing. I hope, I hope it's ebbing.
And just in the United States again, isn't it? Yeah,
in the United States, Um, and there's plenty in Europe
and Japan. It's basically Europe, Japan, and the US are
the leaders in issuing patents for this kind of stuff.
Like basically, if you want to push the rest of
(13:57):
the world around, you go get a patent at one
of one of these areas patent offices. So uh, well,
let's talk specifically about the US, right, Um, let's talk patents. Yeah,
if you want to get a patent, you have to
you have to meet some criteria. Um. It doesn't matter
what the patents for, whether it's for the dippie bird
(14:17):
or you know, for human growth hormone. Um. And so
for any any invention to get a patent to be
a proof for a patent, um it has to meet
for criteria. Right, has to be useful, it has to
be non obvious, right, Like it can't be a shoe string.
(14:38):
I don't know, I would have non what would an
obvious one be? A wonder an obvious invention would be
um man, I don't know. I'm just curious. Maybe using
peppermint too too, um fight bad breath? Maybe obvious. Yeah,
(15:00):
it's obvious. Anybody can do that. You can't patent that.
There you go, there's air non obvious example. Um. It
has to be novel, right, um. And it has to
meet the enablement criterion, which is a big deal. And
this is pretty much the whole reason patents exist. One
of the big reasons. It's got to have detail. It
can't be just a big, broad, esoteric thing. It's got
(15:21):
to be detailed enough where someone in that field can
figure it out and use it, right, And this is
this is one of the major reasons the patent office exists.
It's to say, Okay, thank you for sharing your findings
with the rest of the world. We're gonna give you
twenty years of exclusivity. But in return, you're you're being
totally transparent. Here's all of the processes, here's all the notes,
(15:44):
here's anything that anybody working in your field can can
look at and use to build upon your research, or
they pay you well, but can they get it and
change it enough to where it doesn't You can't. And
those are called patent trolls and a only they're a
big problem right now. They're they're towarding technology. I think
tech stuff did something on patent trolls recently. Interesting. Yeah. Um,
(16:08):
so you if you are issued a patent, you get
twenty years of exclusivity. Nobody can use it, uh um,
market it, sell it anything as you do with your
invention or process unless they pay you. They have to
go through you, and you license it and reap the benefits, right, Yeah.
And the reason it was such a mad rush when
the genome project was first completed because obviously the first
(16:31):
person to invent something gets the patent. So if you
can prove that, then that's yours for twenty years. So
well that's based on the first to invent principle. Yeah,
right exactly, So you have to prove that and then
after that you've got it for twenty years. And everyone
was in a big rush to be the first with
these gene patents. Have you heard the story of um
(16:51):
Alexander Graham Bell and Elijah what was his name? Do
you mean? The real guy? He would invented the telephone? Yeah,
what's his name? Oh? Was that the case? I knew
there was some stink there, but I wasn't sure. Um,
Elijah Gray. Apparently Elijah Gray invented a telephone that looked
and worked way way more like the ones we used today,
(17:15):
I should say, the ones we used in the used
in the seventies and eighties. Right. It wasn't stealth phone,
but you know, the kind of rotary dial all that. Um.
But Alexander Graham Bell beat him to the patent office
and um, now did he steal his ideas? Or was
it just confirms independent? Um? And I can't remember what
that's called. But there's there's there's an idea that, like
(17:37):
you know, oh the zeitgeist, we're all, you know, ideas
kind of float out there for anybody to latch onto,
and sometimes people do independently. I wonder how far apart
they were from each other and being completed, And like
I wonder if it was literally literally like my horse
fell sick that day and I couldn't make it to
the office. Um, but did I don't remember how how
close it was, but it was pretty close. Um. So Uh,
(18:01):
the Patent office has this first to invent principle where
it's not necessarily like who beat who to the patent office.
It's if you have a situation like that, who's been
working on this longer or who reached a landmark longer,
and then that's who gets the patent. That's why there
was like you said that mad rush, because you know,
it's like I noticed this first, so let me go
(18:24):
ahead and get my patent in well. And with the
case of like insulin or any of any of these
gene patents, really you can't just say like, oh, I
got this thing like you. They have to have it
on file, which is something I never knew. There are
twenty six culture depositories around the world thanks to and
this is such a mouthful, thanks to the Budapest Treaty
(18:44):
on the International Recognition of the deposit of Microorganisms for
the purpose of Patent Procedure. So basically, it's like a
repository where you send in your sample, right, and that
the way I understand it, um, And there's twenty six
of them worldwide, right, Yeah. And if it is a
a product of if it's something you remove from from
(19:05):
the body and processed, the patent only applies to the
very end result that you send in, not like the
little stages along the way, although you can patent that
those stages, Yeah, but they just have to be independent
of one another, right yeah, alright. So, um, you've you've
submitted your sample to a depository, you have applied for
(19:27):
the patent, it's been issued. You're good to go. Um,
what are you patenting? Right? Like, I think there's a
huge misunderstanding among the public that you're walking around and
the some company owns the the rights to your genes. True? False? False?
(19:50):
That is false. I mean the gene patent is kind
of a misnomer. It's a pretty big misnomer actually, because
there's certain criteria that have to be met. Like you,
you you have natural Um what is it natural matter? Um?
Is it is that always called? Or something of nature?
Composition of nature? Genes are a composition of nature in
(20:12):
your body. To patent something, you have to extract genes
and get them to do like, you know, jump through
a flaming hoop outside of the body. Then you have
something called composition of matter. Right. Um, So what are
some of the things that people are getting gene patents for? Well,
it breaks down, my friend, into four categories pretty much. Uh,
(20:34):
you won't go one at a time. Yeah, for a change. Diagnostics,
that means, uh, they're looking to patent a method. Basically
generally it tests for genetic differences, abnormalities, uh, spotting genetic
markers and cancer, alzheim or stuff like that. Right, pretty
nice way to use your time, I think it is.
(20:56):
But it's also very controversial. As we'll see in a
little bit this not all of it is, but three
of the four are, right. And with diagnostics, what you're
patenting is in fact the gene that you're looking at
or the genes involved, and the um the mutations. Right,
so you have a bunch of different possible mutations, right,
(21:18):
but a very sharp company. And by the way, by
saying you need to know what you're talking about or
you need to have put some sort of UM research
into this basically excluded schmos like you and I from
getting gene patents. And just said, huge laboratories, huge corporations
are the only ones who can possibly get gene patents now. Um,
so if you have a very sharp laboratory or very
(21:39):
sharp corporation, they're gonna have a patent for every possible
mutation for a specific gene and then ultimately what they're
patenting is the screening process. The test hit exactly used
to evaluate these mutations. So that's number one. UH functional
uses the second that is pretty much just discovering roles
(22:00):
played by genes. Uh. They're usually issued for drugs that
affect the functioning of the genes. Yeah, so I guess
insulin would be that. Uh No, insulin is composition of matter.
So functional, we understand that this mutation on this gene
causes this to happen. So we're going to create a
(22:20):
drug that makes the gene act normally, expressed normally something
like that, And that's the that's the future of UM
pharmaceuticals is genetically tailored drugs because right now, when you
take a drug right Thailand all or something, you're just
throwing something in the in the wind and hoping it works. Right,
(22:41):
genetically tailor drugs, it's like, look at your genetic composition
and then say, well, this is the drug you need
and it will work at the time and it will
work effectively. Dollars, please make it check out. UH process
is the third type of patent in this category, and
that's pretty easy. That's basically protecting a method by which
(23:05):
the genes are extracted or manipulated. And it's the least
controversial out of all these because it's not it's a
more traditional kind of patent, right, This is like science. Yeah,
and then you have composition of matter. That's yeah, composition
of matter and diagnostics are the two most controversial. And
composition of matter is like human growth hormone insulin stuff
(23:28):
that saves lives. Um and but it's an invention quote
unquote it is, I mean like creating human growth hormone
using E. Coal i to string together amino acids. That's
an invention and hats off to you. So what's what's
the controversy? What's the problem with gene patents with it's
(23:49):
issuing twenty years of exclusivity to somebody who you know,
teaches the coal i to string together amino acids. Well,
there's a couple of different controversies, one the ethical and
social and economic, the others the legal. As far as
legal goes, if you're against it, you're gonna argue that, dude,
(24:09):
these are your genes. There is nothing more natural than
the genes in your body, So of course you can't
patent them. And it doesn't matter what you do to them,
like it's still based on this product of nature. That
just leave it alone, Like this should be this, This
is the heritage of humankind. It's us, it's what makes
us us. Of course, we shouldn't be issuing patents to
(24:31):
corporations on genes, say, say the critics of gene pat
right proponents would say, hey, dude, if we can extract
this from the body and manipulate it many times to
the point where it's not even the same as before,
then of course you should be able to patent that right.
And and that's one of the reasons why we have
patents is to reward innovation, to reward very smart people,
(24:53):
and to encourage more innovation and research and things that
save lives, like so you don't have to extract growth
formon from the pituitary glance of the dead um myriad genetics.
Should we talk about that. It's a good example. This
is a big one. Uh. They filed seven patents relating
to h r C A one and b r C
(25:13):
A two. Basically, what they developed was a test kit
for breast and ovarian cancer. Right, and these these two
um genes account for I think, like of breast de
ovarian cancer, I think breast cancer. So it's pretty substantial.
And uh, Myriad got a patent on the screening kit
(25:33):
that they created, and they promptly turned around and sent
letters to just about every cancer screening laboratory in the
world right and said, hey, we're here that you guys
are saving people's lives. That's awesome. I think, keep up
the good work. Just make sure that you send all
of your cancer screening when it relates to these two
(25:53):
genes to us, and we'll do it, and we're going
to charge you for it. And throughout the world, people
in laboratories through these letters up in the air and
and clucked their tongues and stroked their beards and anger
and strutted about their flasks and and in Canada it
was just overtly ignored. The Canadian government itself stepped and
(26:14):
it was like, you don't need to listen to these crackpots. Um.
In Europe it was very controversial. I think it's largely ignored.
So it's upheld I think in the US because this
was the country that issued the patent, But elsewhere they're like,
we're not listening to you. And for a long time,
Myriad didn't do anything. There wasn't any lawsuits. Uh, and
(26:34):
then there was one, and in two thousand and ten
the company, um, yeah, Well the U. S. District Court said,
now we're not We're not going to support this. And
then in two thousand eleven Court of Appeal for the
Federal Circuit overturned that lower court's decision, so it went
up one step higher and Myriad got satisfaction. They got
(26:55):
Myriad satisfaction. Yeah, you know that means thirty tho. It's
an actual number, Myriad. Yeah, just like decimated as ten.
But this is one that I'm I'm on the side
of the people using it correctly because I can't stand
it when someone says like I had a myriad of yeah,
when it's supposed to be just myriad, I had thirty
(27:17):
thousand costs. See that's where I disagree with the thirty
thou part, Like, say it correctly, but come on, or
you could just say like I had a myriad of
costs and then wink afterywere like, I don't want to
talking about him, just pull my finger. So the Myriad
case continues. I did I did, like when it was
(27:38):
initially ruled against the ruling judge. He sounded really like
a who was Andy Griffith's judge character or no lawyer character,
Matt Luck it's a that's a lawyer's trick. That's what
he called it. And then they Supreme Court said, no,
it's not a trick. They modified it, your honor. I
don't know spit about lawyer, but do know the human heart.
(28:01):
I never saw that show. I didn't either, but there
was a good Senenate live send up of it. Of course,
still Hartman did r I P. Phil Hartman. So ethical
social challenges and controversies, this is where it gets hot. Yeah,
and I guess we should say, like we just kind
of left it, like myrroads up in the air. That's
(28:22):
the standard for what's going on in the US right
now as far as gene pattents go. And that was
just a few months ago. The Pattent Office is honoring
its obligations, and then the courts are people are suing people,
and the courts are just going all over the place.
So it's just totally up in the air whether or
not this is going to be allowed or what kind
of standards will eventually adopt the heat of this. Yeah,
(28:44):
we are so yeah, let's talk about ethical the ethics
of this, right yeah. I mean it's sort of along
the same lines in a way as the legal challenges,
because proponents are gonna say, you know this, this is
great for research. If you don't, if you don't allow this,
then companies aren't gonna be able to make a profit
(29:06):
from this. So there's going to be no incentive if
to to continue this kind of research. Reacharch is gonna stop.
And this research is important. Like you can say what
you will about Myriad, but they're screening test saves lives
and if they invented it, then this sort of breaks
down almost into private sector capitalism versus because if the
(29:27):
private sector dried up because they couldn't make any money
off this stuff, all the research would be left to
government funded laboratories. Right. It's it's very much divided among
capitalists socialist lines, and I think though that people who
normally wouldn't consider themselves socialists are falling into the critics
camp just from the just the idea of you know,
(29:50):
having gene patents out there. It's it is something that
I think a lot of people think should just belong
to all humankind. But the the free market proponents do
may a pretty good case. You know, if that if
you don't reward innovation and invention and clever yeah the
(30:12):
techniques monetarily, then you have a problem. On the other side, though,
you can say, well, you're also issuing monopolies on things
that like our life saving that a company can charge
whatever they want, Like what will you pay to find
out you know whether you have cancer? Or what will
you pay for a drug that will get rid of
(30:34):
your cancer, Chuck Bryant, Because we know your genetic makeup
and we know that this will work perfectly with your
genetic makeup. How much will you pay for that? And
we're the only company you can get it from. I'd
pay everything I had. Yes, you would know, and so
would you know every other person who had the same
similar genetic makeup as you, which is problematic. And also
(30:56):
if it if it, here's your cancer, but the three
weeks later your head explodes, but it doesn't happen in everybody.
That company has zero incentive to make its product so
that it doesn't make you know, the thirty percent of
people's heads explode because it has a monopoly. What are
you gonna do? You're still gonna buy this thing. Right.
(31:17):
Another argument for is that at least what this process
does is creates transparency and research. It's all out there.
Everybody knows there's people might not be wasting their time
duplicating research a and be uh people can build on
your research and it will propel it further into the future.
(31:38):
Should pretty good argument there. Yeah, but you can understand
why this is not a cut and dried argument. Well,
the A m A says we know, like, yeah, the
A m A saying like that this won't help support
research for American Medical Association. It's saying that, um, it
will inhibit uh research on genetic disease and basically, even
(32:01):
worse than that, it will inhibit access for the average person.
So I want to give an example of what is
at stake here. Okay, so we've kind of seen like,
you know, this kind of this kind of reward does
propel innovation and research. Right, But there's this UM with
(32:22):
the Plant Act of UM that allowed people to genetically
modify plants Luther Burbank, Yeah, um and then get patents
for those. There's a company called Monsanto and Montsano came
up with this idea called UM Genetic Use Restriction technology.
It's UM also known as terminator technology, where they have
(32:44):
figured out how to insert a gene basically a suicide
gene into its seeds. It's genetically modified seeds right for
second seeds, yes, so for the first generation seed you
your plant just grow like normal, like a normal genetically
modified organism. It will produce seeds, but those seeds it
(33:07):
produces are sterile because it has a gene in it
that that won't allow it to produce seeds that can
be used again. This means that you have to go
to Monsano to buy their seeds. You can't hoard their
seeds and replant next year. Every year you have to
go and buy their seeds. This is fine and dandy
for very wealthy farmers in the West, but no matter
where you are in the world, if you want to
(33:29):
grow this you know UM cricket resistant type of wheat
that Monsano owns a patent on, you got to buy
it from Monsano and you have to buy it every
year wheter what you can afford or can't. And basically
there's a really good argument that you should not be
allowed to to own a patent a license on a
(33:50):
process as natural as a plant producing offspring producing seeds.
So that's one example that a lot of people point
to is like cautionary tale. Well, they for against gene pattons.
They did not, Monsanto did not. They still hold this.
They didn't release it and say this is what we're doing.
You know, they actually vowed to not do that. Yeah,
(34:11):
they said, we won't do it, but you've got to
sign this agreement if you do business with us, or
we'll start releasing this right, And the agreement says that
you won't reuse seeds that you get from their genetically
modified plants. And didn't they buy up the company that
was originally ah Delta and pine Land Company. They ended
up buying them up, didn't they? Yes, and they they
(34:34):
this company has said has vowed the opposite that they're
going to start using that terminator gene commercially. Oh they have. Yeah.
So a lot of people are very nervous about whether
or not that genetic use restriction technology will come into play.
But I mean it's already effectively in play. We should
do a Monsanto podcast that would be explosive, would be
(34:59):
very explosive. We will. So that's gene pattents. This is uh,
we haven't done one of these in a while. I'm
quite sure we're gonna hear from people on both sides
of this issue, and we want to. Yeah, I think
we did a good job this time of keeping our
own dirty laundry out of it. Yes, we did. Kudos
to you, buddy. And um so if you we have
a bunch of stuff on Jeanes and Gene Pattents on
(35:19):
how Stuff Works dot com, just type in Gene Pattents
that will bring up a lot of stuff, including a
quiz which you could say is maybe a compendium to this,
uh this episode. Who wrote this one? Uh, Michael Franco,
I don't Yeah, he does everything does um, But yeah,
it was a pretty good article. But just type in
(35:40):
Gene Patton said the search bar how stuff works dot Com. Also,
don't forget check out the corporation. Uh, it's just a
really interesting documentary. Um. And I said search bar in
there somewhere. So that means it's time for listener mail.
And this is the winning listener mail, is it? It's
the first one? Really? Yeah, promised a book to the
(36:03):
the The author of this email will receive a free
copy hardcover copy of John Hodgman's incredible book about the
end of the world. The third in this trilogy of
knowledge World Knowledge called That Is All, which just came
out of November one hof and you really should buy it. Yeah,
(36:24):
except for this person, John's a buddy and stuff. But
it's a very very fun book. Um all right, I
kind of forgot that when I picked this, but I
think this Turkish listener is is uh, he deserves it,
so yeah, we'll go with him, The Lucky Turk, The
Lucky Turk. Hey, guys, listening to you from Turkey. I
(36:45):
guess I gave that away. I really love the podcast.
Thanks a lot for what you're doing. This might sound
a bit like complaining, thought wait, wait, wait, I'd prefer
that I don't come across this complaining. And I don't
know if you even have any more listeners from Turkey,
But in various episodes, every time you mentioned Turkey, like
when somebody was stuck in Turkey on the last episode
(37:05):
where you were wondering if people can surf on the
boss for us Phosphorus Bosporus, it always kind of sounds
like you look down on Turkey a bit, to be honest. Untrue.
Now we we talked about being stuck in Turkey and
how awful that would be. That's I don't recall that
because I would love to go to Turkey sometimes. I
have a friend who played bass in the second most
(37:27):
popular Turkish rock band in the late nineties. Really yeah,
I don't remember the name of it, but PEPSI did
a poll of Turks and my friend's band came in
second and most popular was your friend Turkish. No, he
went to Turkey just for the heck of it and
ended up in the number two most popular rock band
in Turkey. That's probably not hard to do. See, that's
(37:49):
what this guy's talking about. It's you, Chuck, I'm getting
wrapped up in your problems, al right. Sorry to drag
you down. You guys seem to be a couple of
people who would like to know the facts. So I
just wanted to suggest you check out things like ohlu
Deniz Turkey, or maybe Fethaette Turkey or Bodrum Turkey in
Google images. I'm just saying, I don't think anyone wouldn't
(38:12):
mind being stuck in Turkey, really, if you really know
what Turkey was like, and I did look these places up, dude,
you know, gorgeous Turkey also arguably has the world's first city.
I can't remember what it's called, but it's just because
I felt like I have to say this since I'm
already writing an email. There is no surfing on the Bosphorus,
not even swimming on the Bosphorus. It's kind of dangerous.
(38:33):
Usually it's just bigger ships crossing country that use that,
and there are no beaches there. But Turkey is surrounded
on three sides by the sea, basically a peninsula, so
there's windsurfing, every kind of water sport you can think
of on the seaside cities. Uh. In the media, Turkey
comes across as if it was a dusty hut and
primitive country, which I think is what I had been saying,
(38:55):
and I should say. When I worked for my last company,
which was a chicken software company, one of our clients
was in Turkey and some of our guys would go
over there to the chicken farms and it was awful too.
They would come back saying, please God, don't ever send
me to Turkey again. They were in like the awful
part of Turkey. They were raising chickens and Turkey. Yeah, yeah,
(39:18):
I have to say that, though only some small cities
on the eastern edges are like that, guys. The people
in different clothes are more interesting than people to look
at who look like most of us, who look like
every other European country. So the media only reflects the
different part, kind of like only showing rednecks grilling steak
on a shopping cart I've never seen. I guess I'm
(39:41):
gonna the rest of Turkeys pretty much like California, great climate, people,
social and cultural, culturally, even especially Istanbul, it resembles a
very crowded San Francisco, not Constantinople, what with all the
hills and the bridges and the hipsters. So that is
from goes to ge z d E And dude, you're
(40:03):
getting a book. And I am sorry for bad mouthing
Turkey because I did look at pictures and it's nothing
at all like I thought. I'm not sorry for bad
mouthing Turkey because I didn't. I didn't and if I did,
I was totally joking. Then I feel like I owe
this guy book. Yeah, the only place in the world
I would never go is Detroit. I totally go to Turkey.
Detroit's awesome. So what's the name goest you get a book?
(40:26):
So you're gonna have to write back in Yeah, we
need your mailing address, goest to, and we should probably
make them, you know, pay the difference for international shipping. Well,
and it's Turkey. It probably just says goes to Turkey.
That's his name, because we'll just put a bunch of
stamps on it and throw it in the water exactly. Uh.
Goest to send us an email with your mailing address, UM,
(40:48):
because we really think there probably are more than one
of you in Turkey. Uh and uh to all the
rest of you. If we send an emails, UM, thank you.
We'll try to read them, but you get no books.
If you want to get in touch with us, you
can on Twitter, s y SK podcast, on Facebook, Facebook
dot com, slash stuff you Should Know, and via email
at stuff Podcast at how Stuff works dot com. Be
(41:19):
sure to check out our new video podcast, Stuff from
the Future. Join how Stuff Work staff as we explore
the most promising and perplexing possibilities of tomorrow, brought to
you by the reinvented two thousand twelve camera. It's ready,
are you
Stuff You Should Know News
Hosts And Creators
Chuck Bryant
Josh Clark
Show Links
AboutOrder Our BookStoreSYSK ArmyRSSPopular Podcasts
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.
40s and Free Agents: NFL Draft Season
Daniel Jeremiah of Move the Sticks and Gregg Rosenthal of NFL Daily join forces to break down every team's needs this offseason.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.