Crichton Vs Calfee Summary

587 Words3 Pages
Paper 2 A person who owns a small portion of someone's genes may be the deciding factor on whether a person's illness is further researched or put on hold. Should a person be given this much power over our very genes inside us whose research could save lives and cure diseases? A physician, Michael Crichton, who wrote “Patenting Life” and a economist, John Calfee, who wrote “Decoding the Use of Gene Patents” both discuss this medicinal dilemma. Crichton and Calfee share the same concerns, but they have both come to different conclusions regarding the future that gene patenting holds on research. In one case, Crichton discusses the cost that these patent holders can have on the medicine that is made by conducting research on genes. In such instances, Crichton discussed of how patents are slowing down research and raising the costs of testings done to determine certain illnesses. Crichton states that “Buchanan talks about testing for breast cancer that they raise cost exorbitantly: a test for breast cancer that could be done for $1,000 now costs $3,000” (441). He then informs that no one else can test for it, the genes can't be donated to others, and it's technically not their property (441). This unfortunate…show more content…
He talks about one researcher's beliefs “one of the academic researchers and co-plaintiffs was quoted to the effect that gene patents like this one not only increase medical costs but impede academic research” (443). However, he also reports about a Times article that he finds was better balanced and the evidence points to that gene patents don't greatly affect research (443). Evidence that was found during his research of various articles report opposite findings than those of Crichton. Calfee concludes with the fact that researchers don't worry about patents and ultimately patients are the winning party during this
Open Document