Ted Slavin's Story and more.
Unlike Moore's story, a man named Ted Slavin who in the 70's took his bodily substances and obtained profit from it. Slavin was born a hemophiliac, the only cure was infusions from donors blood. At the time the blood wasn't screened for disease and was therefore was exposed to Hepatitis B. His blood contained high concentrations of H.B. antibodies which is where his doctor advised that this could potentially earn him revenue.
From there pharmaceutical companies were willing to pay for some of Slavin's samples. Unlike most people, Slavin wasn't too interested in money due to him working odd jobs at the time, he was more wanting for someone to find a cure for H.B.. He found Nobel Prize winner virologist Baruch Blumberg who eventually found a cure (antigen). Slavin then founded Essentials Biologicals where others could follow in the same steps Slavin took for people to sell the blood and other samples.
The difference is situations from Slavin and Moore was the fact that Slavin's doctor was informative with the potential of the bodily substances. Had Moore's doctor said something of the importance of his spleen tissue, Moore would have made a quick buck as well as felt proud he'd helped millions of lives.
There is no argument when it comes to compensation for what patients contribute to scientists and their research. If there is no initial agreement, the patient has no argument. Moore's fault was that he argued for compensation to intellectual property that Golde had gained from research that used Moore's property. Should Moore receive a sum for what he contributed, yea sure but after Golde's success might not have been the best time to want claims to what was his. The argument could always refer back to the right not over the physical cell but science and intellectual property behind the patent.
From there pharmaceutical companies were willing to pay for some of Slavin's samples. Unlike most people, Slavin wasn't too interested in money due to him working odd jobs at the time, he was more wanting for someone to find a cure for H.B.. He found Nobel Prize winner virologist Baruch Blumberg who eventually found a cure (antigen). Slavin then founded Essentials Biologicals where others could follow in the same steps Slavin took for people to sell the blood and other samples.
The difference is situations from Slavin and Moore was the fact that Slavin's doctor was informative with the potential of the bodily substances. Had Moore's doctor said something of the importance of his spleen tissue, Moore would have made a quick buck as well as felt proud he'd helped millions of lives.
There is no argument when it comes to compensation for what patients contribute to scientists and their research. If there is no initial agreement, the patient has no argument. Moore's fault was that he argued for compensation to intellectual property that Golde had gained from research that used Moore's property. Should Moore receive a sum for what he contributed, yea sure but after Golde's success might not have been the best time to want claims to what was his. The argument could always refer back to the right not over the physical cell but science and intellectual property behind the patent.
