Blog of the Society for Menstrual Cycle Research

For Now, Your Genes Belong to You

April 6th, 2010 by Elizabeth Kissling

Guest Post by Barbara A. Brenner Executive Director, Breast Cancer Action

One of the saddest aspects of capitalism is that companies think they can and should own anything they get their hands on. Some time ago, they started obtaining patents on human genes, including two genes implicated in breast cancer: BRCA1 and BRCA2.

The company that obtained the patents on these genes is called Myriad Genetics. With the patents, Myriad controls both the tests given to women to see if they carry mutations on these genes that may predisposed them to breast and ovarian cancer, as well as all the research related to the genes.

How can anyone own our genes? Up until now, no court has been asked that question. But last week, in a ground breaking decision, a federal judge in New York declared that Myriad’s patents on the breast cancer genes are invalid because they patent a part of nature.

That may seem like an obvious thing to most of us, but the research community is up in arms about how their inability to patent genes will inhibit their ability to innovate new treatments. Sounds plausible, but don’t be fooled. These patents are more about making money than they are about taking care of people who are sick.

Breast Cancer Action, an education and advocacy organization that carries the voices of people affected by breast cancer, was a plaintiff in the lawsuit brought by the American Civil Liberties Union against Myriad over the patents. Because — unlike almost all other breast cancer organizations — we don’t accept funding from Myriad or other companies that profit from breast cancer, we could stand up for  the interests of patients who either couldn’t afford the very expensive test, or who couldn’t learn what their “ambiguous” test results meant because the research wasn’t being done to find out.

Ambiguous gene test results are not uncommon, and they are most often found in women who are not white. So, once again, the worst impact of health policy – in this case, the policy to allow genes to be patented – fell on the people who were most likely to have the worst breast cancer outcomes.

Thanks to the ACLU, the Public Patent Foundation and a federal judge, the patents on the breast cancer genes are now invalid. That means that, once the decision becomes final, new tests will be on the market, and researchers will be able to pursue a greater understanding of what mutations on the genes mean.

Myriad will appeal. The case will probably eventually end up in the US Supreme Court. Myriad might get a stay of the trial court ruling pending that appeal. If they do, we’ll have to wait for our genes to be returned once again to their rightful owners – us.

Reprinted with permission.

Post to Twitter Post to Plurk Post to Yahoo Buzz Post to Delicious Post to Digg Post to Facebook Post to MySpace Post to Reddit Post to StumbleUpon

Tags: , , , , ,
Posted in Law/Legal, Philosophy | 1 Comment »

Is PMDD Genetic?

March 9th, 2010 by Elizabeth Kissling

White lab mouse sitting in a gloved palm.

Guest Post by Amber Steele, University of Cambridge

There have been a couple of stories in the press recently touting a study by Joanna Spencer and colleagues suggesting that PMDD may be genetic. I had a cursory look through the paper and read the article. Changes in dendritic branching of neurons in the limbic system across the menstrual cycle, owing to changes in estrogen, has been well documented in the female mice and rat. Additionally, changes in neuronal activity and accompanying receptor activity is also well document during periods of hormone change, again in the female mice and rat models. Individual differences in how this change occurs and the fact that it can be linked to differences in genes make sense. It seems that Spencer et al., have identified one of probably many genes that mediates these differences. This is not the first time that a gene of this kind has been identified or implicated. For example, Susan Girdler at Chapel Hill has done some interesting work on PMDD and suggests a genetic i.e., differing protein response to a hormone, difference in response to progesterone that might, in part, explain symptoms associated with PMDD.

The fact that Spencer et al., found a relationship to anxious behavior does not say anything conclusively about PMS or PMDD. It only states that if you have this variant then your levels of anxiety may change as estrogen fluctuates.

The news article is exploiting the findings from the Spencer study to construct a simplistic view of varying responses to hormone change within and across women. I suppose the author of the news article thought it might be interesting to examine the debate on whether or not there is a “clinically disordered” state during the luteal phase of the menstrual cycle in some women and whether it should be recognized officially. While it may do this, it also perpetuates misunderstandings and stereotypes about women’s hormones and their emotional states.

Amber Steele is a graduate student at the University of Cambridge with a biomedical background. She is writing a thesis is on wellbeing over the menstrual cycle and how it relates to hormonal “biomarkers” cortisol and progesterone.

Post to Twitter Post to Plurk Post to Yahoo Buzz Post to Delicious Post to Digg Post to Facebook Post to MySpace Post to Reddit Post to StumbleUpon

Tags: , , ,
Posted in New Research, Newspapers, PMDD, PMS | Comments Off

Readers should note that statements published in re: Cycling are those of individual authors and do not necessarily reflect the positions of the Society as a whole.