TECHNOLOGY: Two Biotech Companies Withdraw Embryo Patents

By IPS Correspondents Reprint | | Print |

Ramesh Jaura

BONN, Oct 12 2000 (IPS) - Two biotech companies, that had applied for a patent on human-animal embryos, have declared that they will no longer include human embryos in their patents anywhere in the world.

The two companies are Stem Cell Sciences (SCS) of Australia and Biotransplant of USA.

They had jointly applied for a patent covering the cloning of embryos, including human embryos, as well as mixed species embryos from pigs, cows, sheep and humans.

In addition, the companies applied for an exclusive right for genetic manipulation of embryos produced with their technology.

According to Greenpeace Germany’s genetic engineering campaigner Thomas Schweiger, the withdrawal makes the two biotech companies the first to admit having gone too far in claiming patents on human embryos.

However, they made no concession on abandoning patents on life.

Greenpeace welcomed the voluntary commitment, which came after the organisation exposed the patent application to the public last week.

However, Greenpeace warned that patents on life would be granted as long as the law permits.

Greenpeace demands that the European Union’s Patent Directive be changed in such a way that it would prohibit all patents on life.

In a statement this week, SCS said: “Patent claims identified by Greenpeace and others as encompassing methods for human reproductive cloning or the genetic modification of humans …will in any future instance be amended so as to specifically exclude this possibility.”

The statement said, Greenpeace had raised concerns directly with SCS and BioTransplant regarding possible plans to patent human embryos.

It added; “SCS and BioTransplant are strongly opposed to such a concept and support Greenpeace’s position in this matter.”

Schweiger said that the two biotech companies had conceded that their claims had gone too far in patenting human embryos and abandoned their outrageous claims.

“Although this is a small step forward, such voluntary commitments will not generally stop a practice that is permitted by law.

“In a broad sense, the industry still continues to treat all life forms as patentable human inventions that can be exploited for profit,” he added

Schweiger said, this unexpected turn in the debate over patents should send an important signal to political decision-makers in European countries, most of whom are in the process of incorporating the controversial EU Patent Directive into national law.

In their application seeking patent, the two biotech companies reveal that their scientists have already produced embryos, which were a mix of the human and a pig species.

This was done by removing the nucleus from the pig’s egg cells (oocytes), and replacing them with those taken from human foetuses. The resulting embryos were then grown for about a week.

No specific concrete medical reasons were given for undertaking the experiments to produce mixed-species embryos.

The experiments were performed mainly to demonstrate that such nuclear transfer technology could be applied to humans as well as animals, with the intention to then obtain a broad patent on the technology used and on the embryos produced with that technology.

Genetic Engineering campaigner for Greenpeace Germany Christoph Then said the existing patenting regime was a driving force for this kind of speculative research in the rush to claim ownership of new techniques.

“This is why Greenpeace demands that the EU Patent Directive has to be changed to prohibit patents on life,” said Then.

“Under the new EU Patent Directive this patent is likely to be granted by the EPO without any major problems. Because of the loopholes, the EU Patent Directive in many cases treats human embryos as biological material isolated from human body, and therefore patentable.”

Then said biotech companies simply exploit the legal loopholes of the existing EU Patent Directive. As the EPO interprets all exemption from patentability as narrowly as possible – and grants patents unless they are explicitly forbidden – life is not covered by any exclusion from patenting.

“Europe is about to take up a scandalous practice which can not be reversed unless the EU governments urgently take action to overhaul the EU Patent directive before it is implemented into national laws of the member states,” Then added.

According to a Greenpeace publication, the environmental organisation is against all patents on life. It is against granting patents on human life, including body parts or genes, and also against patents on animals and plants, micro-organisms, seeds, and genes of plants and animals.

“Life is not a human invention — even if it is isolated and taken from its natural place and function. Greenpeace is against patents on life because they are degrading life. Moreover living beings should not be treated as commercial commodities,” adds the publication.

Several institutions such as the principal churches in Germany, European doctors, and experts on ethical questions in France and Denmark have taken a similar position regarding the EU directive. They say patents covering human embryos and parts of the human body can be a threat to human dignity.