Who would own the HeLa cell line if the Henrietta Lacks case happened in present-day South Africa?

IF 2.5 2区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS Journal of Law and the Biosciences Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1093/jlb/lsad011
Donrich W Thaldar
{"title":"Who would own the HeLa cell line if the Henrietta Lacks case happened in present-day South Africa?","authors":"Donrich W Thaldar","doi":"10.1093/jlb/lsad011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The HeLa cell line was created in 1951 without consent from Henrietta Lacks, the person whose tissue sample was used. In 2021, the descendants of Henrietta Lacks sued a well-known biotechnology company for the profits it made from the HeLa cell line. In this article, ownership of the cell lines is investigated from a South African legal perspective by considering three possible contemporary scenarios bearing points of similarity to the Henrietta Lacks case. In the first scenario, informed consent is obtained to use a tissue sample for research and to commercialize the products of such research; in the second scenario, informed consent is materially deficient because of an honest mistake on the part of the research institution; and in the third scenario, informed consent is materially deficient due to willful disregard of the law on the part of the research institution. In the first two scenarios, ownership of the cell line created from the tissue sample would vest in the research institution, and the research participant would not have any legal action for financial compensation. However, in the third scenario, ownership of the cell line would vest in the research participant, who would be able to claim all profits made from trading the cell line. Whether the research institution acted in good faith is therefore a crucial determinant of the legal outcome.</p>","PeriodicalId":56266,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Law and the Biosciences","volume":"10 1","pages":"lsad011"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10198699/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Law and the Biosciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsad011","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The HeLa cell line was created in 1951 without consent from Henrietta Lacks, the person whose tissue sample was used. In 2021, the descendants of Henrietta Lacks sued a well-known biotechnology company for the profits it made from the HeLa cell line. In this article, ownership of the cell lines is investigated from a South African legal perspective by considering three possible contemporary scenarios bearing points of similarity to the Henrietta Lacks case. In the first scenario, informed consent is obtained to use a tissue sample for research and to commercialize the products of such research; in the second scenario, informed consent is materially deficient because of an honest mistake on the part of the research institution; and in the third scenario, informed consent is materially deficient due to willful disregard of the law on the part of the research institution. In the first two scenarios, ownership of the cell line created from the tissue sample would vest in the research institution, and the research participant would not have any legal action for financial compensation. However, in the third scenario, ownership of the cell line would vest in the research participant, who would be able to claim all profits made from trading the cell line. Whether the research institution acted in good faith is therefore a crucial determinant of the legal outcome.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
如果亨丽埃塔·拉克斯的案子发生在今天的南非,谁会拥有海拉细胞系?
海拉细胞系是在1951年未经亨丽埃塔·拉克斯(Henrietta Lacks)同意的情况下创建的,她的组织样本被使用了。2021年,亨丽埃塔·拉克斯的后代起诉了一家知名生物技术公司,要求该公司从海拉细胞系中获利。在本文中,通过考虑与Henrietta Lacks案件相似的三种可能的当代情景,从南非法律角度调查了细胞系的所有权。在第一种情况下,获得知情同意,使用组织样本进行研究并将此类研究的产品商业化;在第二种情况下,由于研究机构的无心之失,知情同意存在重大缺陷;在第三种情况下,由于研究机构故意无视法律,知情同意在实质上是有缺陷的。在前两种情况下,从组织样本中产生的细胞系的所有权将归属于研究机构,研究参与者无需采取任何法律行动以获得经济赔偿。然而,在第三种情况下,细胞系的所有权将归属于研究参与者,他们将能够要求从交易细胞系中获得的所有利润。因此,研究机构的行为是否诚信是决定法律结果的关键因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Law and the Biosciences
Journal of Law and the Biosciences Medicine-Medicine (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
7.40
自引率
5.90%
发文量
35
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Law and the Biosciences (JLB) is the first fully Open Access peer-reviewed legal journal focused on the advances at the intersection of law and the biosciences. A co-venture between Duke University, Harvard University Law School, and Stanford University, and published by Oxford University Press, this open access, online, and interdisciplinary academic journal publishes cutting-edge scholarship in this important new field. The Journal contains original and response articles, essays, and commentaries on a wide range of topics, including bioethics, neuroethics, genetics, reproductive technologies, stem cells, enhancement, patent law, and food and drug regulation. JLB is published as one volume with three issues per year with new articles posted online on an ongoing basis.
期刊最新文献
Accelerating biosimilar market access: the case for allowing earlier standing. Forensic genetics in the shadows. The law for mini-organ prototypes in a dish. Mapping the legal status options for organoids in Swiss law. Intellectual property issues for open science practices in genomic-related health research and innovation in Africa. Uterus transplants and Mexico's rule of law.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1