Patents in Biotechnology: Potential Impacts on Life Expectancy and Hunger

As changes in food requirements and healthcare continue to be major issues across the globe, the biotechnology industry is escalating its role as a leader in adaptation. From genetic engineering to gene mutation, the biotechnology industry is devising new ways for us to think about our health and agriculture. As the biotechnology industry expands this scientific creativity, it is simultaneously pushing the boundaries of genetic patenting. However, could these new ideas in patenting also alter the way we understand life expectancy and hunger?

In a recent article in the American Bar Association Journal, Brendan Smith notes how biotechnology patents may be reducing the life expectancy of one cancer patient. The patient possesses a mutant gene that has been patented by one biotechnology company “pre-empt[ing] research over an entire body of knowledge,” according to Chris Hansen from the American Civil Liberties Union. Consequently, to determine if this mutated gene puts her at risk for breast cancer, she is obligated to pay this company the costs for genetic testing necessary for treatment, some $3,200 (US). Sadly, she cannot afford the amount and her life is at risk.

The difference between human and plant genes is slim, although patents associated with their technology have differed. In the past, patents on plant seed utility have been more relevant to farming with genetically modified plants than genetic patenting itself. Farmers have been more likely to be threatened by patents driving seed use than costs associated with genetic research. For example, a Canadian farmer was sued for patent infringement for unlicensed seed use in the Canadian court case, Monsanto Canada, In. v. Schmeiser.

However, suppose farmers become inundated with crop threatening plants, or “super-weeds” possessing patented mutated genes, like the gene in the cancer patient. And, suppose the farmer wanted to prevent damage to his crops from the mutated plants, similarly to the cancer patient trying to prevent life damage from the cancer gene. Perhaps, because of the patent, the costs associated with testing and research to remedy his crops would be, also, so pricey that the farmer would not be able to pay.

According to Brian Johnson, an ecological geneticist from England, an event like this would be possible. “Super-weeds” have the capability of multiplying rapidly, threatening and destroying crops and surrounding farm lands. For food growers providing crops to low income countries, such a case would be detrimental. Not only would a scenario like this destroy food crops, but conversely could cause soaring food prices if testing and research were to occur. This could potentially lead to increased hunger or even agricultural land use changes.

Innovations in the biotechnology industry have vast societal impacts. Yet, debates over the patents protecting this industry underscore the risks and opportunities associated with its new technologies. Timely research and stakeholder involvement are undoubtedly essential for better understanding this industries limitations and capabilities, particularly in its contributions to human health and the environment.

by Candy Schibli