Letter: Patents and cures for genetic disease
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: Your article on gene patents ("Medical charity in row over gene patents", 29 July) could mislead your readers into believing that there was much disagreement amongst medical research charities regarding patents on human genetic information. This is not true and it is important that you should make clear that the position of the Association of Medical Research Charities on gene patents is broadly similar to that of the Genetic Interest Group.
The AMRC represents nearly 100 medical research charities and 85 per cent of the registered charity expenditure on UK medical research (amounting to pounds 420m in 1996/7). The AMRC took almost 18 months to discuss and consult with its members on this very complex issue. As with many other organisations, there were initially many different points of view, but over time a clear consensus emerged. In April this year the AMRC published a statement which supported the proposal for a European directive on the legal protection of biotechnological inventions.
In common with many other groups the AMRC takes the view that gene sequences in themselves represent only discovery and not invention and therefore should not be patentable. But all inventions need sensible, non-bureaucratic and effectively enforced patent regulation if they are to be commercially developed. Biotechnology is no exception. It is important for patients that medical research leads to a better understanding and new treatments but for this to be achieved industry must be encouraged to invest to take forward the research that the charities have begun.
Potentially, many patients could benefit from the outcomes of genetics research: thus, the AMRC believes that commercial exploitation of genetic information is in the public interest if it creates new treatments which will improve human health.
DIANA GARNHAM
General Secretary
Association of Medical Research Charities
London EC1
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments