An Interest In:
Web News this Week
- March 28, 2024
- March 27, 2024
- March 26, 2024
- March 25, 2024
- March 24, 2024
- March 23, 2024
- March 22, 2024
Some of Our Sources
- Mashable
- Web Designer Wall
- Just Creative
- Pearsonified
- Spoon Graphics
- You The Designer
- 24 Ways
- Spyre Studios
- Android Headlines
- Hashedout
Help Webnuz
Referal links:
June 17, 2013 11:00 am GMT
Buried in the ongoing PRISM debacle, there was actually some hopeful news out of Washington D.C. for startups this week. The Supreme Court ruled this week that naturally occurring genes can’t be patented, which should be a boon for the host of emerging gene testing and patenting companies that are coming out of the Valley. Silicon Valley VCs like Founders Fund, Khosla Ventures, Felicis Ventures and SV Angel have been making more bets in the space, on the assumption that biology is becoming a space that can be attacked by software. In the case, a company called Myriad Genetics had acquired patents on BRCA1 and BRCA2, two genes that are strongly correlated with breast and ovarian cancer. Because of their patents, the cost of testing for those genes had been pushed higher, sometimes beyond the $3,000 range. That would have made it too expensive for many middle- and low-income women to learn if they were at risk for the cancers. At the same time, other human genes were being scooped up with somewhere north of 20 percent of all human genes being covered by patents, according to the National Society of Genetic Counselors. The leading gene patent holders are unsurprisingly pharmaceutical giants like DuPont and GlaxoSmithKline, that startups would have a financially hard time competing against in courts. The court ruled that human genes can’t be patented, but that synthetic genes can be protected. Now that naturally occurring human genes can’t be patented, expect gene testing companies to benefit broadly with lower-cost products across the board. The costs for full human genome sequencing have already fallen to about $8,000 today from $100 million in 2011. One of the remaining barriers preventing lower-cost testing has been whether consumers would be on the receiving end of high licensing fees to the patent owners of these genes. Patent holders like Myriad could also monopolize the testing market for these genes too, which would have also forced prices higher. One company that I’ve written about, Counsyl, tests prospective parents for any hereditary diseases they might pass onto their children like Tay-Sachs Disease. They’ve gotten such broad adoption in medical clinics across the U.S. that they’re now testing for approximately 2 percent of all births in the country every year. While CEO Ramji Srinivasan didn’t want to comment for this story, you could expect that gene testing companies which don’t currently offer tests linked to
Original Link: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Techcrunch/~3/yMF0R6s5R7Q/
Supreme Court Ruling On Gene Patenting May Be A Boon For Biotech Startups
Buried in the ongoing PRISM debacle, there was actually some hopeful news out of Washington D.C. for startups this week. The Supreme Court ruled this week that naturally occurring genes can’t be patented, which should be a boon for the host of emerging gene testing and patenting companies that are coming out of the Valley. Silicon Valley VCs like Founders Fund, Khosla Ventures, Felicis Ventures and SV Angel have been making more bets in the space, on the assumption that biology is becoming a space that can be attacked by software. In the case, a company called Myriad Genetics had acquired patents on BRCA1 and BRCA2, two genes that are strongly correlated with breast and ovarian cancer. Because of their patents, the cost of testing for those genes had been pushed higher, sometimes beyond the $3,000 range. That would have made it too expensive for many middle- and low-income women to learn if they were at risk for the cancers. At the same time, other human genes were being scooped up with somewhere north of 20 percent of all human genes being covered by patents, according to the National Society of Genetic Counselors. The leading gene patent holders are unsurprisingly pharmaceutical giants like DuPont and GlaxoSmithKline, that startups would have a financially hard time competing against in courts. The court ruled that human genes can’t be patented, but that synthetic genes can be protected. Now that naturally occurring human genes can’t be patented, expect gene testing companies to benefit broadly with lower-cost products across the board. The costs for full human genome sequencing have already fallen to about $8,000 today from $100 million in 2011. One of the remaining barriers preventing lower-cost testing has been whether consumers would be on the receiving end of high licensing fees to the patent owners of these genes. Patent holders like Myriad could also monopolize the testing market for these genes too, which would have also forced prices higher. One company that I’ve written about, Counsyl, tests prospective parents for any hereditary diseases they might pass onto their children like Tay-Sachs Disease. They’ve gotten such broad adoption in medical clinics across the U.S. that they’re now testing for approximately 2 percent of all births in the country every year. While CEO Ramji Srinivasan didn’t want to comment for this story, you could expect that gene testing companies which don’t currently offer tests linked toOriginal Link: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Techcrunch/~3/yMF0R6s5R7Q/
Share this article:
Tweet
View Full Article
Techcrunch
TechCrunch is a leading technology blog, dedicated to obsessively profiling startups, reviewing new Internet products, and breaking tech news.More About this Source Visit Techcrunch