A soon to be relative linked to that and made a small rant about it.
I am a member of the ethnic group these gene mutations are derived from. As a result, it is a topic close to my heart — literally — and that if having a test, and then a surgery, could remove my risk of undergoing cancer treatment, I would do it in a minute. They are just fleshy appendages. They served their purpose, they provided sustenance to my three children, and I want to live to see my grandchildren grow up.
One of my aunts had ovarian cancer at the same age I am now, and had a hysterectomy. My own risk is very high because of such a close relative having this particular cancer. Do I know for certain we carry the gene? No, because I haven’t had insurance since before this was a test that was covered by insurance, and I surely don’t have the $3000 it costs for the test.
My grand daughters are at risk for these diseases. Simply because of heritage. This is a mutation that allows for passing on of the mutation to the rest of the offspring because the children are already birthed and nursed before the disease reveals itself. I can’t even imagine what Angelina must have gone through as a teenager, having her mother fall ill with this genetically linked cancer and die when she was only in her early 20′s. Especially since if the technology had been available earlier to test her mother, they may never have had to go through that horror.
Then I read the following link:
Here’s the thing. The risks are real. I don’t think there is any amount of money imaginable that could induce an already fabulously wealthy woman to have this type of surgery, as painful and disfiguring (temporarily at least) as it is, to give publicity and a positive spin on a Supreme Court case that would benefit a private company trying to patent a human gene.
What the hell are these people thinking???
For one thing, the guy who wrote that article obviously knows how to massage statistics. The numbers he gets don’t exactly add up to what he’s saying they do if they are taken in context with his actual data. I hate it when people do that to prove a point. F*ing either make your point honestly, without massaging data, or find some other way to convince people. And that goes for medical trials too.
I personally think it is utter BS for the company to even ATTEMPT to patent this, and for them to withold/prosecute other companies for trying to offer the testing at more reasonable rates. If this were any other country but the US, we would not even be having this discussion! Frankly, if the Supreme Court were going to be influenced by public opinion, Monsanto would be out of business, abortion would still be illegal, and the election of 2004 might have come out very, very differently.