[Helena Fembo]

When does ownership of your body end?

I just finished reading The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks (Henrietta Lacks died of cervical cancer. The cells were taken from her when she was still alive and were the first human cells that were able to be grown in a lab. They are still used worldwide and contributed to many medical discoveries such as vaccines and how cells work. Her cell line is a multi-billion dollar business. The family never recieved a single cent) It raised a number of issues that have got me thinking.

My understanding is that when you have a biopsy done, or blood drawn, or anything like that. The cells/tissues are kept and may be used for research purposes. The cells from Henrietta Lacks were used to learn about AIDS, create vaccines, sent into space, and were used to test nuclear weapons.

What say should people have over these parts of their bodies that have been removed? Should you receive part of the profits if your cells end up being pretty unique and end up being bought and sold for a lot of money?

This post has been edited by Helena Handbasket: 20/12/2012, 01:16 PM

[Angelina Balleri...]

I can only hope that one day I have a biopsy that makes such an amazing contribution to medical science.

In pathology labs and hospitals, blood samples are kept for a week or two in case further tests are needed and then they are destroyed. I think you need to provide consent for samples to be used for research.

I don't expect my family to get any money or reward for my donated organs and view this the same way.

[MakeLoveNotBacon]

I'm not familiar with the story. Did she give permission? Do the family have sour grapes?

How much profit would there really be based on just her cells? Were they some how unique, different to others? Or could any cells have been used? I'm not sure how it could be concluded that her cell line alone is a multi-billion dollar business. What about the guys doing the work; developing, discovering?

I also think it's a pretty amazing contribution.

[Helena Fembo]

Would you be equally ok with your cells being used to test and/or aid the developmentd of nuclear weapons or methods of biological warfare?

[MakeLoveNotBacon]

Was permission sought? My answer really depends on whether permission was granted or not.

[Helena Fembo]

I'm not familiar with the story. Did she give permission? Do the family have sour grapes?

How much profit would there really be based on just her cells? Were they some how unique, different to others? Or could any cells have been used? I'm not sure how it could be concluded that her cell line alone is a multi-billion dollar business. What about the guys doing the work; developing, discovering?

I also think it's a pretty amazing contribution.

No. She didn't give permission. The family did have 'sour grapes' as at one point, they were paying a buttload of money (they were poor and had no health insurance) for medication that was created as a result of their mothers cell cultures. (there are many other issues as well)

It certainly is a multi-billion dollar business. "Henrietta’s cells were the first immortal human cells ever grown in culture. They were essential to developing the polio vaccine. They went up in the first space missions to see what would happen to cells in zero gravity. Many scientific landmarks since then have used her cells, including cloning, gene mapping and in vitro fertilization." from Smithsonian.com. The book mentioned a single vial of her cells being worth well over US$100, labs all over the world use these cells.

This post has been edited by Helena Handbasket: 20/12/2012, 03:29 PM

[Chief Pancake Ma...]

From what I remember the tissue samples were taken in the USA back in 1950ish? Laws about consent were pretty much non existant then.

I Australia we have the tissue act which is very strict about getting consent for samples and prohibits the sale of any tissues or organs.

[countrymel]

From what I remember the tissue samples were taken in the USA back in 1950ish? Laws about consent were pretty much non existant then.

I Australia we have the tissue act which is very strict about getting consent for samples and prohibits the sale of any tissues or organs.

Yes the damn human tissue act meant I couldn't bring my gallstones home! I have seen them cut and polished before and really wanted to use them in my jewellery!

I have signed consent forms that allow our embryos (if there are any left over) to be used in clinical experimentation, so I think I'd also be fine if they wanted to use my tissue/blood/etc.

[Sinister Bonnet]

It's a fascinating book which raises many issues.

Then? I think the family should have been given a share in the money made from Henrietta's tissue. Now? It would not occur to me to ask for money but I think the mapping of the human genome has changed a lot of perceptions.

But that family were poor and lied to and it is a terrible story.

[jameses mum]

My mother had two malignant, but non-metastatic tumours removed from her bowel over 20 years ago.
For a long time (years)they were "kept alive" in a lab in Melbourne and used for a lot of research.
Because of the extraordinarily strong familial incidence of bowel cancer in three generations (so far) of my maternal family we have all been tested regularly.
I know I would have no problem if because of this research a vaccine or treatment was developed that saved lives

This post has been edited by jameses mum: 20/12/2012, 07:51 PM