If that person created that gene from scratch and there is no natural equivalent, then yes. However if the gene already exists then they cannot.
It would be like inventing and patenting the wheel in the first case (since nobody else has it yet) and trying to patent fire in the second (since anyone could have it).
That is a question for which some would say yes and others would say no. The first issue to agree on would be the answer to "What is a perfect human being?" Since it is highly unlikely that any agreement would ever be reached, it is probably best that attempts to create a perfect human being not be attempted.
Yes if it serves the purpose of helping to find a disease.
No because their could be problems and complications.
Yes, but why would anyone buy that.
in 1989 us approve gene therapy exprement on human
The first concern is the destruction of human embryos to extract stem cells. Pro-life activists argue that embryos are a form of life and should be allowed to live. Another argument is that stem cell research can devalue human life as it can lead to consent of reproductive cloning.
palms out front up it is a universal positions for anyone studying the human body
it should be required for human body. and the answer is VITAMINS
Yes, but why would anyone buy that.
no. it should never happen
so then you can know who is the smartest person
because if there were no human rights many countries could suffer from the police and anyone can do anything to anyone and the higher rate of crime could increase more becausf the is no rights to protect anyone.
It is a basic human right in the free world.
human gene patent report
Yes, individuals should generally have the freedom to choose where they live based on their personal preferences and circumstances. However, factors such as zoning laws, housing availability, and environmental considerations may restrict this freedom in certain cases.
yes, in my opinion. my username is christino.
No human being is expendable and you should never refer to anyone as such.
The central canal is part of the human spine. When it is said that it is patent, that means that the openings of the spine area are open.
it should and it shouldn't. it should because it depends if the person wants the procedure to be performed or not. it shouldn't because it goes against some religions about death and if a human should decide how a human must die.
Every one should know that the pollution is the human issue in the grand canyon anyone that did not know that is stupid