Angelina Jolie cuts her boobs off to save her life; douchebags unite to lament.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Relevant:

Fucking PERFECT.

[Suu]

Fucking yes.

[AFK]

This is just a weird story.  I mean, bravo for her doing what she needs to do to protect her health amd her life but she's not exactly a trailblazer here.  And people getting upset at her for her decision is beyond lame. 

[Junkenstein]

http://www.marketplace.org/topics/business/high-cost-angelina-jolies-cancer-testing

Angelina Jolie wrote an Op-Ed in today's New York Times about her decision to have a double mastectomy. The actress didn't have breast cancer, but tests showed she had almost a 90 percent chance of developing it. The key was finding a mutation in a gene known as BRCA-1, and Jolie appealed for the test to be made more accessible to women around the world.

At the moment, if you want to get tested for a mutation on your BRCA-1 or BRCA-2 genes, you will have to turn to Myriad Genetics. That's the company that discovered the link between those mutations and an elevated risk cancer -- and it patented the BRCA-1 and BRCA-2 genes.

The price tag on a BRCA-1 and BRCA -2 test? More than $4,000.

"Because Myriad has a monopoly on the genetic testing, they determine the cost of that test," says Sandra Park, senior staff attorney at the ACLU's Women's Rights Project. Park argued before the Supreme Court last month that Myriad shouldn't be able to patent a gene and control research.

One of the main arguments against gene patents is that they hamper scientific progress.

Now this seems like a conversation worth having. I doubt change is likely but it has always pissed me off that you can patent genes like this.

[Suu]

http://www.marketplace.org/topics/business/high-cost-angelina-jolies-cancer-testing

Angelina Jolie wrote an Op-Ed in today's New York Times about her decision to have a double mastectomy. The actress didn't have breast cancer, but tests showed she had almost a 90 percent chance of developing it. The key was finding a mutation in a gene known as BRCA-1, and Jolie appealed for the test to be made more accessible to women around the world.

At the moment, if you want to get tested for a mutation on your BRCA-1 or BRCA-2 genes, you will have to turn to Myriad Genetics. That's the company that discovered the link between those mutations and an elevated risk cancer -- and it patented the BRCA-1 and BRCA-2 genes.

The price tag on a BRCA-1 and BRCA -2 test? More than $4,000.

"Because Myriad has a monopoly on the genetic testing, they determine the cost of that test," says Sandra Park, senior staff attorney at the ACLU's Women's Rights Project. Park argued before the Supreme Court last month that Myriad shouldn't be able to patent a gene and control research.

One of the main arguments against gene patents is that they hamper scientific progress.

Now this seems like a conversation worth having. I doubt change is likely but it has always pissed me off that you can patent genes like this.

It's bullshit, and apparently she thinks so too. Sure, she has the 4k to shell out for a test, but the monopoly isn't fair to anyone, really. Not even celebs. Breast cancer is life or death, people, not a cash cow...never mind. America.

[Anna Mae Bollocks]

http://www.marketplace.org/topics/business/high-cost-angelina-jolies-cancer-testing

Angelina Jolie wrote an Op-Ed in today's New York Times about her decision to have a double mastectomy. The actress didn't have breast cancer, but tests showed she had almost a 90 percent chance of developing it. The key was finding a mutation in a gene known as BRCA-1, and Jolie appealed for the test to be made more accessible to women around the world.

At the moment, if you want to get tested for a mutation on your BRCA-1 or BRCA-2 genes, you will have to turn to Myriad Genetics. That's the company that discovered the link between those mutations and an elevated risk cancer -- and it patented the BRCA-1 and BRCA-2 genes.

The price tag on a BRCA-1 and BRCA -2 test? More than $4,000.

"Because Myriad has a monopoly on the genetic testing, they determine the cost of that test," says Sandra Park, senior staff attorney at the ACLU's Women's Rights Project. Park argued before the Supreme Court last month that Myriad shouldn't be able to patent a gene and control research.

One of the main arguments against gene patents is that they hamper scientific progress.

Now this seems like a conversation worth having. I doubt change is likely but it has always pissed me off that you can patent genes like this.

It's bullshit, and apparently she thinks so too. Sure, she has the 4k to shell out for a test, but the monopoly isn't fair to anyone, really. Not even celebs. Breast cancer is life or death, people, not a cash cow...never mind. America.

Yeah. Monty Burns-like life extension for a few people and the rest of us can die with boobs full of cancer. WE'RE NUMBER #1!!!!!

[Junkenstein]

It's just a little glimpse of the future. The biggest company yet to be created is probably "Legit Cancer Cure Inc" or something similar. Regulation in biotech seems crazy as fuck to me. Between the shit Monsanto and co get away with and now this name becoming substantially more public, it becomes clearer to me that the laws are broken as fuck here.

Example: Company justifies 4K pricetag with insurance covering most and YOU just pay 100 dollars. Groovy right?

What's one of the main reason insurance companies use for price hikes? Increased claims (When not bitching about fraud).

To me, this would just create a cycle where new advances justify price hikes. The procedure may not be mandatory, but surely if offered this test for say 1 dollar, how many would refuse? Forcing people to balance their health against their wallet just hits me as morally fucking wrong. Sacrifice a couple of fucking banks and fund the shit out of medical advances and make them as open to all as possible.

I've had a suspicion for a while that if the global arms and medical spending was switched for 10 years, immortality would be a possibility for those born in the next century. I guess immortality isn't worth really having though.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

It's just a little glimpse of the future. The biggest company yet to be created is probably "Legit Cancer Cure Inc" or something similar. Regulation in biotech seems crazy as fuck to me. Between the shit Monsanto and co get away with and now this name becoming substantially more public, it becomes clearer to me that the laws are broken as fuck here.

Example: Company justifies 4K pricetag with insurance covering most and YOU just pay 100 dollars. Groovy right?

What's one of the main reason insurance companies use for price hikes? Increased claims (When not bitching about fraud).

To me, this would just create a cycle where new advances justify price hikes. The procedure may not be mandatory, but surely if offered this test for say 1 dollar, how many would refuse? Forcing people to balance their health against their wallet just hits me as morally fucking wrong. Sacrifice a couple of fucking banks and fund the shit out of medical advances and make them as open to all as possible.

I've had a suspicion for a while that if the global arms and medical spending was switched for 10 years, immortality would be a possibility for those born in the next century. I guess immortality isn't worth really having though.

Once again, I am thinking about David Marusek's fictional dystopian future, in a world owned by corporations headed by a functionally immortal elite.

It seems likely.

Bioscience patents seem to serve only to stifle, rather than promote research. Years ago, someone (I think in Switzerland) isolated a prolific enzyme that was highly transferable via saliva, that prevented tooth decay.

There is negative incentive, under the current research-for-profit environment, for anyone to develop that. If someone owned the genetic patent on the enzyme, they could even prevent publicly-funded labs from developing it.

It disappeared and was never heard of again, so that may have happened.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Some Ms America lady did this recently.  She was getting death threats for it.

[Anna Mae Bollocks]

Some Ms America lady did this recently.  She was getting death threats for it.

ALL YR TITS IS BELONG TO US
                     /

[Suu]

People suck.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

http://www.marketplace.org/topics/business/high-cost-angelina-jolies-cancer-testing

Angelina Jolie wrote an Op-Ed in today's New York Times about her decision to have a double mastectomy. The actress didn't have breast cancer, but tests showed she had almost a 90 percent chance of developing it. The key was finding a mutation in a gene known as BRCA-1, and Jolie appealed for the test to be made more accessible to women around the world.

At the moment, if you want to get tested for a mutation on your BRCA-1 or BRCA-2 genes, you will have to turn to Myriad Genetics. That's the company that discovered the link between those mutations and an elevated risk cancer -- and it patented the BRCA-1 and BRCA-2 genes.

The price tag on a BRCA-1 and BRCA -2 test? More than $4,000.

"Because Myriad has a monopoly on the genetic testing, they determine the cost of that test," says Sandra Park, senior staff attorney at the ACLU's Women's Rights Project. Park argued before the Supreme Court last month that Myriad shouldn't be able to patent a gene and control research.

One of the main arguments against gene patents is that they hamper scientific progress.

Now this seems like a conversation worth having. I doubt change is likely but it has always pissed me off that you can patent genes like this.

It's bullshit, and apparently she thinks so too. Sure, she has the 4k to shell out for a test, but the monopoly isn't fair to anyone, really. Not even celebs. Breast cancer is life or death, people, not a cash cow...never mind. America.

There's another side to that.

Give the way our system operates, the companies need to patent, to get any sort of return on their research.

Unless we restructure everything.  The brits used to offer prizes to people that solved particular problems (the gear-driven clock, for example, for navigation).