Living on Earth: GENES FOR SALE

[nosmokes]

if you're not familiar with *living on earth it's a great little radio program by the CBC, a shining example of what public b'casting can and should be. many PBS stations run it down in the states. if your's doesn't contact 'em and tell 'em they should. and not at 1:00am.

--###--



Living on Earth: GENES FOR SALE

What if someone took your DNA, cloned it in a lab and then claimed it as their rightful property? Sounds like science fiction but it’s already happened. Rapid advances in biotechnology raise concerns about the ownership of genetic material. Living on Earth re-airs our 1995 award-winning piece “Who Owns Life? Patenting Human Genes” by reporter Bob Carty. Host Jeff Young then follows up with Pat Mooney, a source in the piece. Mooney is the executive director of ETC (Etcetera) Group, a Canadian watchdog organization that tracks international issues of property rights of genetic material.


YOUNG: It's Living on Earth. I'm Jeff Young. For the last few weeks, we've been marking the sixteenth anniversary of our program by revisiting and updating some of the award-winning stories from our archives. For the final installment of our series, we're pointing the way back machine to 1994, one of the first reports to highlight concerns about what was then a new practice; claiming ownership of genetic material—in particular, the DNA of human beings.

Reporter Bob Carty, of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, explored the tale of a human cell line from a group of Panamanian Indians, on which the United States Government had taken out a patent. The story raised the fundamental question of "who owns life" and it won an Edward R. Murrow Award from the Radio and Television News Directors Association.

We'll take a listen to that story now, and afterwards we'll catch up with the Canadian activist who was among the first to draw attention to the practice of patenting human genes. Here's Bob Carty.
~snip~
.
.
.
complete article including links to real player and mp3 and other sources here

[pitohui]

1. what's really unfair is when the material is taken from a person seriously ill

i read abt this several years ago in the nation, forgive me if i don't have a link, but a seriously ill (possibly terminal) man had his DNA taken, cloned, and used in the development of some medicine

he wasn't paid nor was he even given the medicine to use for free, he was billed many thousands of dollars for his treatment, tried to sue to get some fairness but as far as i know, he lost the case

so he gets screwed twice, he is ill plus he is ripped off and can't enjoy the benefit that others (the stockholders) enjoy from his misfortune

anyone remember this or have a better recall of it?

i did know a young man in the early 90s, with a blood disorder, who was fairly paid, $1000 a month for donating his blood, i don't know why blood can be compensated for while DNA cannot, when a person is seriously ill then this compensation may be one of the only ways they have to earn money, this young man had cognitive deficits and wasn't going to be able to work, if he had something of value, he should rightfully be able to sell it as long as selling it doesn't harm him -- i'm not talking about enticing someone to sell an eye or a kidney here