The Commercialization of Human Stem Cells: Ethical and Policy Issues
Cite this article as: Resnik, D.B. Health Care Analysis (2002) 10: 127. doi:10.1023/A:1016554107663 Abstract
The first stage of the human embryonic stem(ES) cell research debate revolved aroundfundamental questions, such as whether theresearch should be done at all, what types ofresearch may be done, who should do theresearch, and how the research should befunded. Now that some of these questions arebeing answered, we are beginning to see thenext stage of the debate: the battle forproperty rights relating to human ES cells. The reason why property rights will be a keyissue in this debate is simple and easy tounderstand: it costs a great deal of money todo this research, to develop new products, andto implement therapies; and private companies,researchers, and health professionals requirereturns on investments and reimbursements forgoods and services. This paper considersarguments for and against property rightsrelating to ES cells defends the followingpoints: (1) It should be legal to buy and sellES cells and products. (2) It should be legalto patent ES cells, products, and relatedtechnologies. (3) It should not be legal tobuy, sell, or patent human embryos. (4) Patentson ES cells, products, and related technologiesshould not be excessively broad. (5) Patents onES cells, products, and related technologiesshould be granted only when applicants statedefinite, plausible uses for their inventions. (6) There should be a research exemption in EScell patenting to allow academic scientists toconduct research in regenerative medicine. (7)It may be appropriate to take steps to preventcompanies from using patents in ES cells,products, and related technologies only toblock competitors. (8) As the field ofregenerative medicine continues to develop,societies should revisit issues relating toproperty rights on a continuing basis in orderto develop policies and develop regulations tomaximize the social, medical, economic, andscientific benefits of ES cell research andproduct development.
commercialization embryonic stem cells patents property rights slippery slope arguments utilitarianism References
Andrews, L. and Nelkin, D. (2001)
. New York: Crown.
Arrow, K. (1972) Gifts and Exchanges.
Philosophy and Public Affairs
Brody, B. (1995)
Ethical Issues in Drug Testing, Approval, and Pricing
. New York: Oxford University Press.
Bruni, F. (2001) Decision Helps Define the President's Image.
New York Times (10 August 2001), A1.
Copi, I. (1986)
Introduction to Logic
, 7th edn New York: MacMillan.
Diamond v. Chakrabarty, 447 US 303, 100 S. Ct. 2204, 65 L. Ed. 2nd 144 (1980).
Eisenberg, R.(1997) Structure and Function in Gene atenting.
English, J. (1975) Abortion and the Concept of a Person.
Canadian Journal of Philosophy
Foster, F. and Shook, R. (1993)
Patents, Copyrights and Trademarks
. New York: John Wiley.
Gearhart, J. et al. (2001a) US Patent 6,090,622.
Gearhart, J. et al. (2001b) US Patent 6,245,566.
Geron Web Page (2001)
www.geron.com. Accessed: 16 August 2001.
Gerson, S. et al. (1997) US Patent 5,591,625.
Gold, E. (1997)
. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
Goodstein, L. (2001) Abortion Foes Split over Bush's Plan on Stem Cells.
The New York Times (12 August 2001), A1.
Greenberger, J. et al. (1998) US Patent 5,766,950.
Guenin, L. (1996) Norms for Patents Concerning Human and other Life Forms.
Hagmann, M. (2000) Protest Leads Europeans to Confess Patent Error.
Hanson, M. (1999) Biotechnology and Commodification within Health Care.
Journal of Medicine and Philosophy
Heller, M. and Eisenberg, R. (1998) Can Patents Deter Innovation? The Anticommons in Biomedical Research.
Holden, C. (2001) HHS Inks Cell Deal; NAS Calls for more Lines.
Juengst, E. (1998) Should We Treat the Human Germ-line as a Global Human Resource? In E. Agius and S. Busuttil (Eds.),
Germ-line Intervention and Our Responsibilities to Future Generations
(pp. 85–102). London: Kluwer Academic Press.
Juengst, E. and Fossel, M. (2000) The Ethics of ES Cells-now and Forever, Cells Without End.
Journal of the American Medical Association
Kant, I. (1785 )
Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals
, Patton H (trans.). New York: Harper Torchbooks.
Kimbrell, A. (1997)
The Human Body Shop
. Washington, DC: Regnery.
Lycan, W. (1987)
. Cambridge, MA: M.I.T. Press.
Marshall, E. (2000) The Business of Stem Cells.
Meilaender G. (2001) The Point of a Ban; or, How to Think about Stem Cell Research.
Hastings Center Report
Miller, A. and Davis, M. (2000)
. Minneapolis, MN: West Group.
Murray, T. (1986) Who Owns the Body? On the Ethics of Using Human Tissue for Commercial Purposes.
IRB: A Review of Human Subjects Research
Normile, D. (2001) Japan Readies Rules that Allow Research.
Ossori, P. (1999) Common Heritage Arguments Against Patenting Human DNA. In A. Chapman (Ed.),
Perspectives on Gene Patenting
(pp. 89–108). Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.
Radin, M. (1996)
. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Resnik, D. (1998) The Commodification of Human Reproductive Materials.
Journal of Medical Ethics
Resnik, D. (2001a) DNA Patents and Scientific Discovery and Innovation: Assessing Benefits and Risks.
Science and Engineering Ethics
Resnik, D. (2001b) Regulating the Market for Human Eggs.
Resnik, D. (2001c) DNA Patents and Human Dignity.
Journal of Law, Medicine, and Ethics
Resnik, D. (2001d) Developing Drugs for the Developing World: An Economic, Legal, Moral, and Political Dilemma.
Developing World Bioethics
Solter, D. and Gearhart, J. (1999) Putting stem Cells to Work.
Stolberg, S. (2001a) House Backs Ban on Human Cloning for any Objective.
The New York Times (1 August 2001), A1.
Stolberg, S. (2001b) Patent Laws May Determine Shape of Stem Cell Research.
The New York Times (17 August 2001), A1.
Savotos, M. (1996) Biotechnology and the Utilitarian Argument for Patents.
Social Philosophy and Policy
Thomson, J. (1998) US Patent 5,843,780.
Thomson, J. et al. (1999) ES Cell Lines Derived from Human Blastocysts.
Titmus, R. (1970)
The Gift Relationship: from Human Blood to Social Policy
. London: Allen and Unwin.
US Constitution (1787) Article 1, Section 8, Clause 8.
Vogel, G. (2000) Stem Cells: New Excitement, Persistent Questions.
Vogel, G. (2001) Can Adult Stem Cells Suffice?
Wade, N. (2001) Clearer Guidelines Help Britain to Advance Stem Cell Work.
The New York Times (14 August 2001), A1.
Wilkinson, S. (2000) Commodification Arguments for the Legal Prohibition of Organ Sale.
Health Care Analysis
Wright, S. (1999) Human ES-cell Research: Science and Ethics.
American Scientist 87 (July' August), 352–361. Copyright information
© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2002