Patent fight could tarnish reputation of a stem cell pioneer
By RYAN J. FOLEY | The Associated Press
.
MADISON, Wis. — After scientist Jamie Thomson isolated human
embryonic stem cells in 1998, colleagues said he had opened the door
to novel medical treatments that would transform science.
A leading journal called it one of the most important scientific
achievements ever. The University of Wisconsin-Madison biologist
appeared on Time Magazine's cover under the headline: "The man who
brought you stem cells."
But nearly a decade after his discovery, some scientists are turning
on Thomson amid a battle over the patent rights to his work.
Dismissing his research as obvious, they claim any scientist with
Thomson's funding and access to human embryos could have done the
same thing.
Their claims have escalated a fight that could tarnish Thomson's
reputation, deprive his school of millions of dollars in future
revenue and loosen restrictions under which U.S. stem cell
researchers have to work. With the stakes high, the fight is turning
increasingly bitter and personal, with each side accusing the other
of greed.
Thomson, who still conducts stem cell research in Madison and has
started two companies from his work, declined an interview request.
But his supporters have been particularly angered by the assault on
the importance of his discovery.
"If it was so obvious, how come they didn't do it? Where were they
then?" asked Nicholas Seay, a patent lawyer who helps run Thomson's
companies.
"The fight is certainly about money, but it's also sort of a stature
thing," he continued. "It wouldn't be good for the university or
Jamie if the patents were revoked. He did invent all this stuff."
Scientists have claimed the patents delayed their work and sent
investment overseas to escape license fees. Their concerns prompted
the California-based Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights to
ask for a federal review of the patents last year.
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office said in March it was preparing
to throw out the patents because research from other scientists paved
the way for Thomson's breakthrough.
The Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation, the arm of the university
that holds three patents for Thomson's discoveries, is trying to
convince regulators to allow them to stand. The fight could take
several years to resolve.
Nobody disputes that Thomson won a worldwide race in 1998 when he
became the first to isolate and cultivate stem cells from days-old
human embryos donated by fertility clinics. The fight is over whether
that breakthrough was novel enough to meet the standard for a patent.
Scientists hope to use stem cells, which eventually grow into all
types of human tissue, to find cures to diseases and perhaps even
replace injured body parts. Some conservatives oppose the research
because embryos are destroyed.
Four scientists have filed affidavits in recent weeks saying research
on mice and other animals made Thomson's work a no-brainer.
"Had other stem cell researchers been given the same human embryos
and funding, they would have done the same thing, because the
technical knowledge needed to derive and culture human embryonic stem
cells was obvious," wrote Chad Cowan, a Harvard researcher.
Thomson's work was "common sense" and "entirely predictable to us,"
added Alan Trounson, a prominent stem cell researcher in Australia.
Those comments haven't sat well in Madison, where Thomson is a rock
star in the scientific community.
WARF responded with an attack on those scientists' credibility,
telling the patent office that two had applied for patents for human
embryonic stem cell research after Thomson. How can they now claim
such work is obvious? WARF asked.
"I think each of these people should be embarrassed,
Gulbrandsen, WARF's managing director. "They should really be saying
that he has opened the door for us to really understand who we are as
human beings and how to take care of some diseases that right now
can't be treated. What he has done is a gift to us all."
John Simpson, stem cell project director for the Foundation for
Taxpayer and Consumer Rights, said it didn't matter that the
scientists backing his group's challenge had applied for patents
themselves. Thomson's work was commendable but not worthy of a
patent, he said.
"A bunch of folks at WARF have dollar signs in their eyes," Simpson
said.
WARF could see a financial windfall if any stem cell treatments hit
the market before the patents expire in 2015 because companies would
have to pay royalties. That money, in turn, would be used to increase
WARF's annual payment to support research at UW-Madison.
In response to criticism, WARF announced in January it would no
longer require companies that sponsor research at universities to pay
for licenses costing up to $400,000. But companies still need
licenses for research in their own labs and must pay royalties if
they develop products from that work.
"Hopefully, we cannot only get some commercial products that make
people's lives better, but we'll continue to help support additional
research at UW-Madison," Gulbrandsen said.
http://www.lacrosse
«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
StemCells subscribers may also be interested in these sites:
Children's Neurobiological Solutions
http://www.CNSfoundation.org/
Cord Blood Registry
http://www.CordBlood.com/at.cgi?a=150123
The CNS Healing Group
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CNS_Healing
____________________________________________
«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
__,_._,___
