IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/medlaw/v33y2025i3pfwaf015..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Patents over ‘technologies’ related to how we treat, use, and modify the human body: An urgent need for greater bioethics scrutiny

Author

Listed:
  • Aisling M McMahon

Abstract

Under the TRIPS framework, patents must be granted in all fields of technology, including health-technologies. Patents give rightsholders significant control over patented technologies as they enable them to exclude others from using these for commercial purposes. The human body per se is not patentable. However, many technologies that relate to how we treat, use, and modify the body are patentable. For example, in Europe, patentable technologies include those that can treat the body (eg, medicines), technologies that can affect how we use elements derived from the body (eg, isolated human genes are patentable in certain contexts), and technologies that can modify (including enhance) the body (eg, neuro-technologies). Using a novel five-category taxonomy of patentable technologies related to how we treat, use, and modify the human body, this article demonstrates that such patents—and their use—can pose significant bioethical implications, focusing on implications for autonomy, dignity, and bodily integrity interests. It demonstrates that these bioethical implications are not routinely considered in European patent grant or licensing decision-making. This article challenges this. It argues that greater scrutiny is needed over these bioethical implications and over the connection that patented technologies have with how we treat, use, and modify the human body.

Suggested Citation

  • Aisling M McMahon, 2025. "Patents over ‘technologies’ related to how we treat, use, and modify the human body: An urgent need for greater bioethics scrutiny," Medical Law Review, Oxford University Press, vol. 33(3), pages 1-015..
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:medlaw:v:33:y:2025:i:3:p:fwaf015.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/medlaw/fwaf015
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:medlaw:v:33:y:2025:i:3:p:fwaf015.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/medlaw .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.