Text3

In2010.afederaljudgeshookAmerica'sbiotechindustrytoitscore.Companieshadwonpatentsfori
solatedDNAfordecades-by2005some20%ofhumangeneswereparented.ButinMarch2010a
judgeruledthatgeneswereunpatentable.Executiveswereviolentlyagitated.TheBiotechnology
IndustryOrganisation(BIO),atradegroup,assuredmembersthatthiswasjusta“preliminarystep”
inalongerbattle.

OnJuly29ththeywererelieved,atleasttemporarily.Afederalappealscourtoverturnedthe
priordecision,rulingthatMyriadGeneticscouldindeedholbpatentstotwogenssthathelpfore
castawoman'sriskofbreastcancer.ThechiefexecutiveofMyriad,acompanyinUtah,
saidtherulingwasablessingtofirmsandpatientsalike.

Butascompaniescontinuetheirattemptsatpersonalisedmedicine,thecourtswill
remainratherbusy.TheMyriadcaseitselfisprobablynotover
Criticsmakethreemainargumentsagainstgenepatents:ageneisaproductofnature,
soitmaynotbepatented;genepatentssuppressinnovationrather
thanrewardit;andpatents'monopoliesrestrictaccesstogenetictestssuchasMyriad's.
Agrowingnumberseemtoagree.Lastyearafederaltask-forceurgedreformforpatent
srelatedtogenetictests.InOctobertheDepartmentofJusticefiledabriefintheMyriadcase,
arguingthatanisolatedDNAmolecule“isnolessaproductofnature...thanarecottonfibres
thathavebeenseparatedfromcottonseeds.”

Despitetheappealscourt'sdecision,bigquestionsremainunanswered.Forexample,
itisunclearwhetherthesequencingofawholegenomeviolatesthepatentsofindividualgenes
withinit.ThecasemayyetreachtheSupremeCourt.

AS the industry advances ,however,other suits may have an even greater impact.
companies are unlikely to file many more patents for human DNA molecules-most
are already patented or in the public domain .firms are now studying how genes intcract,
looking for correlationsthat might be used to determine the causes of disease or predict
a drug’s efficacy,companies are eager to win patents for ‘connecting the dits’,expaains
hans sauer,alawyer for the BIO.

Their success may be determined by a suit related to this issue, brought by the
Mayo Clinic, which the Supreme Court will hear in its nextterm. The BIO rtcently
held a convention which included seddions to coach lawyers on the shifting landscape
for patents. Each meeting was packed.

31.it canbe learned from paragraph I that the biotech companies would like-----

A.their executives to be active

B.judges to rule out gene patenting

C.genes to be patcntablc

D.the BIO to issue a warning

32.those who are against gene patents believe that----

A.genetic tests are not reliable

B.only man-made products are patentable

C.patents on genes depend much on innovatiaon

D.courts should restrict access to gene tic tests

33.according to hans sauer ,companies are eager to win patents for----

A.establishing disease comelations

B.discovering gene interactions

C.drawing pictures of genes

D.identifying human DNA

34．By saying “each meeting was packed”(line4,para6)the author means that -----

A.the supreme court was authoritative

B.the BIO was a powerful organization

C.gene patenting was a great concern

D.lawyers were keen to attend conventiongs

35.generally speaking ,the author’s attitude toward gene patenting is----

A.critical

B.supportive

C.scornful

D.objective