Commercialization of tissue-based research: Time to move beyond the gift/market dichotomy

Biopreservation and Biobanking

Volumn 11, Issue 6, 2013, Pages 397-398

  Hoeyer, Klaus L ^a  

^a Department of Public Health   (Denmark)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIOBANK; HEALTH CARE FACILITY; HUMAN; NOTE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REIMBURSEMENT; ECONOMICS; MEDICAL RESEARCH; STATISTICAL MODEL;

BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; HUMANS; MODELS, ECONOMIC; TISSUE BANKS;

EID: 84890461413     PISSN: 19475535     EISSN: 19475543     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1089/bio.2013.1163     Document Type: Note

References (22)

1. Dickenson D. Property in the Body: Feminist Perspectives. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2007.
2. Laurie G. Genetic Privacy. A Challenge to Medico-Legal Norms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2002.
3. Hoeyer K. Exchanging Human Bodily Material: Rethinking Bodies and Markets. New York: Springer; 2013.
4. Sharp LA. Bodies, Commodities, and Biotechnologies. Death, Mourning, and Scientific Desire in the Realm of Human Organ Transfer. New York: Columbia University Press; 2007.
5. Dixon-Woods M, Wilson D, Jackson CJ, Cavers D, Pritchard-Jones K. Human tissue and 'the public': The case of childhood cancer tumour banking. BioSocieties 2008;3:57-80.
6. Hoeyer K. Tradable body parts? How bone and recycled prosthetic devices acquire a price without forming a 'market'. Bio-Societies 2009;4:239-256.
7. Hoeyer K. Conflicting notions of personhood in genetic research. Anthropology Today 2002;18(5):9-13.
8. Goodwin M. Black Markets: The Supply and Demand of Body Parts. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2006.
9. Taylor J. Stakes and Kidneys. Why Markets in Human Body Parts Are Morally Imperative. Hampshire, UK: Ashgate; 2005.
10. Satel S. Introduction. In: Satel S, editor. When Altruism Isn't Enough. The Case for Compensating Kidney Donors. Washington DC: The AEI Press; 2008. p. 1-10.
11. Parry B. Entangled exchange: Reconceptualising the characterisation and practice of bodily commodification. Geoforum 2008; 39:1133-1144.
12. Clark BJ, Baust JM, Stacey G. How much will biobanking industry come to rely on private companies? Biopreserv Biobanking 2010;8:179-180.
13. Evers K, Forsberg J. What are your views on commercialization of tissues for research? "The best possible use": Against commercilization of tissue samples. Biopreserv Biobanking 2012;10: 476-477.
14. Hoeyer K, Schicktanz S, Deleuran I. Public attitudes to financial incentive models for organs: a literature review suggests that it is time to shift the focus from 'financial incentives' to 'reciprocity'. Transplant Intern 2013;26:350-357.
15. Patra PK, Sleeboom-Faulkner M. Informed consent and benefit sharing in genetic research and biobanking in India: Some common impediments in practice. In: Dabrock P, Taupitz J, Ried J, eds. Trust in Biobanking. Heidelberg: Springer; 2012. p. 237-256.
16. Kowal E, Radin J, Reardon J. Indigenous body parts, mutating temporalities, and the half-lives of postcolonial technoscience. Social Studies Sci 2013;43:465-483.
17. Hayden C. Taking as giving: Bioscience, exchange, and the politics of benefit-sharing. Social Studies Sci 2007;37:729-758.
18. Stegmayr B, Asplund K. Informed consent for genetic research on blood stored for more than a decade: A population based study. BMJ 2002;325:634-635.
19. Steinsbekk KS, Ursin L, Skolbekken J-A, Solberg B. We're not in it for the money-lay people's moral intuitions on commercial use of 'their' biobank. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 2011;16(2):151-162.
20. Winickoff D, Neumann L. Towards a social contract for genomics: Property and the public in the 'biotrust' model. Genomics, Society and Policy 2005;1(3):8-21.
21. Anderlik MR. Commercial biobanks and genetic research: Ethical and legal issues. Am J Pharmacogenomics 2003;3:203-215. (Pubitemid 36827678)
22. Sahlins M. Stone Age Economics. New York: Aldine Artherton; 1972.