ADVERTISEMENT

404

Not Found

Is this what you were looking for?

tag us supreme court disease medicine

Supreme Court Mulls Personalized Med
Bob Grant | Dec 9, 2011 | 2 min read
The high court considers the legitimacy of a patent on the relationship between blood tests and patient health.
Opinion: On the Gene Patent Debate
Courtenay C. Brinckerhoff | Mar 7, 2012 | 3 min read
Two key patent cases that no doubt will impact the future of personalized medicine are pending review by the US Supreme Court. What will the Court decide?
Prometheus Patents Overturned
Sabrina Richards | Mar 20, 2012 | 2 min read
The US Supreme Court ruled that two dose calibration methods from biotech company Prometheus Laboratories cannot be patented.
Do Patents Promote or Stall Innovation?
Catherine Offord | Jun 1, 2016 | 10 min read
A petition recently filed with the Supreme Court triggers renewed debate about the role of patents in the diagnostics sector.
Scientific Advances Carry A Moral Price Tag
Ira Glasser | May 26, 1991 | 3 min read
The history of science is full of examples of advances that seemed marvelous at first, but later turned out to have unexpected effects. Synthetic chemicals--detergents, for example--were produced and used on a large scale before anyone recognized the problems caused by their inability to biodegrade. A similarly adverse situation manifests itself today in the depletion of the ozone layer. The problem is more troubling when the effects of scientific development are legal or sociological. In such
Federal Judges v. Science
The Scientist Staff | Jan 25, 1987 | 3 min read
Katie Wells was born in 1981 with serious birth defects. Her parents attributed them to a contraceptive jelly and sued the maker, Ortho Pharmaceutical Judge Marvin Shoob of the U.S. District Court in Georgia ruled they had proved their case and assessed $5 million in damages against Ortho. The Court of Appeals declined to overturn the judgment and last month the Supreme Court refused to intervene. What is wrong with that? First, the facts. Scientific experts often differ and the courts generally
person with lab coat and blue gloves holding tray with pink liquid <br><br>
Scientists Consider How Overturning Roe Might Affect Research
Natalia Mesa, PhD | Sep 7, 2022 | 6 min read
Researchers who work with materials such as fetal tissue and human embryonic stem cells are facing new restrictions, the latest in a long line of regulations, that could impede important advances.
Notebook
The Scientist Staff | Dec 7, 1997 | 7 min read
November was a rollercoaster month at the National Academy of Sciences (NAS). First, the United States Supreme Court declined to hear NASA's appeal of a lower court ruling subjecting the academy and its committees to the Federal Advisory Committees Act (FACA) of 1972. Animal rights groups argued that under FACA there should have been more public representation on a committee set up to revise the NIH Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals (R. Finn, The Scientist, July 22, 1996, page 1)
Expert Witnesses: Legal Legionnaires
L Deftos | Dec 5, 1999 | 4 min read
Expert testimony is useful to courts when it is presented by impartial, court-appointed experts rather than by legal legionnaires bought and paid for by the warring parties. That is the answer to the question posed by Browne and Keeley in their July 5, 1999 article in The Scientist.1 Although neutral expertise is antithetical to the American adversarial system of Justice, several pioneering judges have used such unbiased experts in complex trials.2 The most recent example is breast implant litig
The Scientist Staff | Mar 19, 2024

Run a Search

ADVERTISEMENT