2. 考研
  3. Personalized medicine has proved an elusive dream. Biotechnology companies have claimed that by matching a person’s genetic make

Personalized medicine has proved an elusive dream. Biotechnology companies have claimed that by matching a person’s genetic make

admin2014-06-25  41
问题     Personalized medicine has proved an elusive dream. Biotechnology companies have claimed that by matching a person’s genetic make-up with specialised treatments, they can tailor drugs to maximise benefits and minimise side effects. Alas, researchers have discovered that the link between a given person’s genetic make-up and specific diseases is much more complex than they had hoped. The tantalizing vision remains out of reach.
    A rare exception has been the success that Myriad Genetics, an American firm, has had with two genes called BRCA1 and BRCA2. Certain versions of these genes, it has been shown, are associated with a high risk of breast and ovarian cancer. The University of Utah has patented the genes and licenses them to Myriad. The firm uses that exclusivity to create expensive genetic tests for cancer risk which only it offers for sale.
    The BRCA patents have long frustrated medical researchers and legal activists. They claim that the firm’s grip on the two genes unlawfully stifles both innovation and basic science. Given the history of patent rulings in America, that has been a fringe argument—until now.
    On March 29th a federal district court in New York made a ruling that, taken at face value, turns America’s approach to the patent protection of genes on its head. The core of the case was this question: "Are isolated human genes and the comparison of their sequences patentable things?"
    Until now, the answer had been "Yes". But Robert Sweet, the presiding judge, disagreed. He ruled: "It is concluded that DNA’s existence in an ’isolated’ form alters neither this fundamental quality of DNA as it exists in the body nor the information it encodes. Therefore, the patents at issues directed to ’isolated DNA’ containing sequences found in nature are unsustainable as a matter of law and are deemed unpatentable subject matter. "
    As a rule, patents are not granted for rules of nature or naturally occurring phenomena, but the A-merican patent office has allowed genes to be patented if they are isolated and "purified. " Perhaps no longer, if this decision is upheld. It is clear that the judge also has the history books in mind. His ruling cites Stephen Breyer, a member of America’s Supreme Court, who argued that "sometimes too much patent protection can impede rather than ’promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts,’ the constitutional objective of patent and copyright protectioa "
    However, the majority of the Supreme Court did not agree with Justice Breyer. Dianne Nicol, a professor of law, observes that "this case turns on whether an isolated gene sequence has markedly different characteristics from a gene that occurs in the human body. The judge in this case has said it does not have different characteristics but it will be interesting to see if the higher courts agree with that. "
The phrase "turn sth on its head"(Line 2, Para 3)most probably means "make someone"______.
选项 A、think about sth. in a different way
B、begin to consider sth. seriously
C、feel proud about sth.
D、defend sth. against disagreements
答案A
解析 第二段指出，医学研究人员和法律活动家认为：Myriad Genetics公司对两组BRCA基因的控制非法扼杀了创新和基础科学。并指出：从美国专利判决历史来看，赞同这种观点者寥寥无几(即：美国法庭大都作出了维护基因专利的判决)。第三段首句(所考词所在句)指出，目前纽约联邦地区法院的裁决就使得美国就“基因专利保护”这一问题。随后指出事件：ACLU就BRCA专利提出诉讼。第四段则在提及以前法庭看法“基因可以申请专利”之后指出本次判决中法官Sweet的意见：基因专利不能得到法律支持。由此可知，该判决似乎标志着美国对“基因是否应受到专利保护”的看法发生了根本的变化，因此[A]选项符合文义。
转载请注明原文地址:https://jikaoti.com/ti/f6MRFFFM
0

考研英语一

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)