



































Introduction


       
 

Bangladesh Journal of Bioethics 2013; 4(2):1-8 

 

 1 

 

 

 
 
BIOETHICS AND PATENT LAW: USA, UK AND INDIA. A BIBLIOMETRIC ANALYSIS 
 
Mona Gupta

1
, Divya Srivastava 

2   
Arvind Singh Kushwah 

3
 

 
 
1,2,3

  Research Scientist, Scientometric Unit, Division of Publication and Information,  
Indian Council of Medical Research (HQ.), Ansari Nagar, New Delhi, India,  
Email: gmona7@gmail.com, drdivta.srivastava@gmail.com, welcomein.arvind@gmail.com 
 
Abstract: This article discusses the view of bioethics in terms of “need of ressearch” and gives 
more weight to various cultural traditions and their respective moral beliefs. It is argued that this 
view is implausible for the following three reasons: it renders the disciplinary boundaries 
of bioethics too flexible and inconsistent with metaphysical commitments of biomedical sciences, it 
is normatively useless because it approaches cultural phenomena in a predominantly descriptive 
and selective way, and it tends to justify certain types of discrimination. Compromise on moral 
matters attracts ambivalent reactions, since it seems at once laudable and deplorable. When a 
hotly-contested phenomenon like assisted dying is debated, all-or-nothing positions tend to be 
advanced, with little thought given to the desirability of, or prospects for, compromise. In order to 
qualify as appropriately principled, the ensuing negotiations require disputants to observe three 
constraints: they should be suitably reflective, reliable and respectful in their dealings with one 
another. The product that will result from such a process will also need to split the difference 
between the warring parties. In assisted dying, I argue that a reduced offence of 'compassionate 
killing' can achieve this. Clinical research is revolutionizing the practice of medicine in an 
unprecedented way. Some current legal and ethical concerns evolving from this revolution are 
addressed, pointing to the emerging concepts in jurisprudence, which regards medical research as 
an important contribution to patient empowerment, to medical risk management and in managing 
the resources of a national health system.  
While bioethics as a field has concerned itself with methodological issues since the early years, 
there has been no systematic examination of how ethics is incorporated into research on the 
ethical, legal and social implications. We aim of better understanding the methods, aims, and 
approaches to ethics that its researchers employ. We found that the aims of ethics are largely 
prescriptive and address multiple groups. This is a life concern issue. It is an important issue for 
researchers, teachers as well as for student. This articles main aim is to provide systematic outline 
of the complex relationship between bioethics and patent between India, USA and UK. This study 
suggests that trusting relationships may be more conducive than any particular discussion strategy 
to facilitating doctor-patient discussions of health care costs. Better public understanding of how 
medical decisions affect insurer costs and how such costs ultimately affect patients personally will 
be necessary if discussions about insurer costs are to occur in the clinical encounter. It will give an 
overview of the bioethics and Patent. The literature survey has indicated that there is no 
comprehensive work has been done by any researcher on this topic. Therefore the present study 
would concentrate on the work being carried out by Indian, USA and UK R & D scientists vis-a-vis 
Global researchers. Studies aims to map basic human needs such as human health, food and a 
safe environment, touches on fundamental values, such as human dignity and the genetic integrity 
of humanity, can raise human rights issues such as access to health and benefits from scientific 
progress, raises concerns over equitable access to the fruits of new technologies, the consent of 
those involved in research, and protection of the environment and compare these among India, 
USA and UK.  The research map out many issues and policy communities, but main aspect is the 
ethical implications of protecting biotechnological inventions through the intellectual property (IP) 
system. A Bioethicist assists the health care and research community in examining moral issues 
involved in our understanding of life and death, and resolving ethical dilemmas in medicine and 
science. This research provides a systematic outline of the complex relationship between bioethics 
and IP. It will give an overview of bioethics. It sketches core principles in the interaction of IP and 
bioethics among these three countries.  

mailto:gmona7@gmail.com
mailto:drdivta.srivastava@gmail.com
mailto:welcomein.arvind@gmail.com


       
 

Bangladesh Journal of Bioethics 2013; 4(2):1-8 

 

 2 

 

 

The basic data for the bibliometric analysis has been collected from SCI and for mapping different 
parameters suitable analytical software eg. SPSS, BibTech Mon is used. The analysis arises 
questions such as: Does India do enough work in this field. Which country is fastest growth among 
these? 

 
Introduction: Bioethics is the study of controversial ethics brought about by advances in biology 
and medicine. Bioethicists are concerned with the ethical questions that arise in the relationships 
among life sciences, biotechnology, medicine, politics, law, and philosophy. Bioethics is the 
process of the matters which occur biologically. Bioethics is the compound word with "bios" which 
represent life or something concerning life with "ethikos" which represent ethics or mores. Both 
words are traced from Greece. Bioethical studies have developed significantly in the United States. 
Bioethics purports to deal with the value and ethical issues that have been brought about by the 
rapid developments of science, technology, and biomedicine during the past fifteen years. 
Bioethical issues are a serious concern for all of us living in an era of "Life-Manipulation". This is 
the reason why the new "supra-interdisciplinary" study of "Bioethics" deals with issues relating to all 
integrated aspects of life's beginning, ending and quality, compared to the too narrow segmentation 
and ramification trends of traditional academic disciplines dealing with human and life issues 
separately. 

The term Bioethics was coined in 1927 by Fritz Jahr, who "anticipated many of the arguments and 
discussions now current in biological research involving animals" in an article about the "bioethical 
imperative," as he called it, regarding the scientific use of animals and plants. Bioethics and animal 
research: A personal perspective and a note on the contribution of Fritz Jahr. Fritz  Jahr's 1927 
concept of bioethics. In 1970, the American biochemist Van Rensselaer Potter also used the term 
with a broader meaning including solidarity towards the biosphere, thus generating a "global 
ethics," a discipline representing a link between biology, ecology, medicine and human values in 
order to attain the survival of both human beings and other animal species.

  

Life science innovations may significantly influence our future. Developments in molecular biology 
and their applications in health technologies and agriculture have provided new perspectives and 
created hope for new solutions. The rapid advances in this area accompanied by grant of patent 
rights on inventions related to, for example DNA sequences, protein sequences, stem cells, and 
other similar technologies, has prompted examination in international flora of the implications of 
intellectual property rights and their ethical underpinnings. Bioethical issues are a serious concern 
for all of us living in an era of "Life-Manipulation".  

"Bioethics" is a result of the various human rights movements responding to the de-humanizing 
phenomena caused by political, economical, technological, and biomedical problems emerging 
since the end of 1950s mainly in the U.S., Europe and some other places in the world. For example, 
these various human rights movements are civil liberty movement, woman's rights movement, 
student movement, and so on. 

It is sure that our future direction should be formed in the framework of public participation by 
having input from the lay-public and the experts in anticipating our "future image" of the world. In 
this sense, the supra-interdisciplinary study of bioethics and its public policy should be based upon 
the notion of "Anticipatory Democracy" as well as an action in "Participatory Democracy".  

The main objective of the study is to provide a systematic outline of the complex relationship 
between bioethics and patent. It will give an overview of the bioethics and Patent. It sketches core 
principles in the interaction of patent and bioethics. It looks at the main sets of issues that are 
emerging, that are challenging and complex issues. It does not offer any readymade or preferred 
solutions to today's difficult questions concerning bioethics and patent. But presents a way of 
clarifying the actual position of patent laws role in issues related to Bioethics. These issues are 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biology
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicine
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_sciences
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biotechnology
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicine
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Rensselaer_Potter


       
 

Bangladesh Journal of Bioethics 2013; 4(2):1-8 

 

 3 

 

 

discussed more fully in a background study, which discusses some of the leading cases mentioned 
briefly in this study bioethics within the law of patents: the scope for judgments about morality in 
assessments on patentability. The field of bioethics has addressed a broad swath of human inquiry, 
ranging from debates over the boundaries of life (e.g. abortion, euthanasia), Surrogacy to the 
allocation of scarce health care resources (e.g. organ donation, health care rationing) to the right to 
turn down medical care for religious or cultural reasons. Bioethicists often disagree among 
themselves over the precise limits of their discipline, debating whether the field should concern 
itself with the ethical evaluation of all questions involving biology and medicine, or only a subset of 
these questions. Some bioethicists would narrow ethical evaluation only to the morality of medical 
treatments or technological innovations, and the timing of medical treatment of humans. The 
literature survey has indicated that there is no comprehensive work has been done by any 
researcher on this topic. Therefore the present study would concentrate on the work being carried 
out by Indian R & D scientists vis-a-vis Global researchers. 
 
About the Database : In view of the importance of bioethics research in the field of human health 
and well being it becomes important to map out the research activities being carried out by 
researchers around the world and in India by Indian Scientist.  For this purpose we need a 
searchable consolidated database, but there is no exclusive comprehensive global database on 
bioethics publications and for Indian efforts also in the field of bioethics. A comprehensive database 
have been developed for Bibliographical Details of all the research Papers  published in USA, UK 
and India. 
 
Methodology: To carry out the research, efforts were made to collect Global information on 
research publications in the field of bioethics and Indian research papers published during last 5 
years .The data sources have been searched using the search string. MEDLINE and ISA were 
used to access the trend individually and in comparison to each other. 
 
Global Publications Analysis: The total numbers of papers published during 2005-09 is 2982. 
During 2009 the number of papers in the field of Bioethics was at its maximum with 51.06% as 
shown by the graph. The cumulative publication share in world research output indicated an 
exponential growth of papers from 8.12 (2005) to 51.06(2009). 
 

 
 
 
Commitment of Countries towards Bioethics Research: India with its global publications share 
of 21.66% computed on the basis of cumulative publications output during the period of 2005-2009. 
The United States tops the list with global publications share of 63.21%. The United Kingdom 
global publication share was 15.12%. 
 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euthanasia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organ_donation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technology


       
 

Bangladesh Journal of Bioethics 2013; 4(2):1-8 

 

 4 

 

 

 
. 
 
Global Share of USA, UK and India: The average growth rate of countries is from -4.29 to 64.27 
during successive years. India‟s annual growth rate increased from -12.07 to 35.17. United 
Kingdom also came up with increased share but its average growth rate decreased from 18.62 to 
18.40. In 2006 its growth rate was maximum 23.05%. United State‟s Average growth increased, 
from 4.29 to 64.27 during the period of 5 years. United State is on the top as in the United States 
more than 25 universities offer degrees in medical ethics. In many instances, the subject also is 
part of the curriculum in the education of physicians and other health care professionals. Many 
medical schools include ethics courses that examine topics such as theories of moral decision-
making and the responsible conduct of medical research. So there is much awareness in Bioethical 
field compression to other country. 
 

 

 



       
 

Bangladesh Journal of Bioethics 2013; 4(2):1-8 

 

 5 

 

 

Analysis of Papers on the basis of Subject area (1981-2005): 75 subject areas within Bioethics 
research were identified, as shown in the list of „key words‟.  Areas of health sciences that are the 
subject of published, peer-reviewed bioethical analysis include: 

1. Abortion  
2. Animal rights  
3. Artificial insemination  
4. Artificial life  
5. Artificial womb  
6. Assisted suicide  
7. Biocentrism  
8. Biopiracy  
9. Biorisk  
10. Blood transfusion  
11. Body modification  
12. Brain-computer interface  
13. Chimeras  
14. Circumcision  
15. Cloning  
16. Confidentiality (medical records)  
17. Consent  
18. Contraception (birth control)  
19. Cryonics  
20. Disability  
21. Eugenics  
22. Euthanasia (human, non-human 
animal)  
23. Exorcism  
24. Faith Healing  
25. Feeding tube  
26. Gene theftGene therapy  
27. Genetically modified food  
28. Genetically modified organism  
29. Genomics  
30. Great Ape Project  
31. Human cloning  
32. Human enhancement  
33. Human experimentation in the United 
States  
34. Human genetic engineering  
35. Iatrogenesis  
36. Infertility treatments  
37. Life extension  
38. Life support  
39. Lobotomy  
40. Medical malpractice  
41. Medical research  
42. Medical torture  
43. Mediation  
44. Moral obligation  
45. Moral status of animals  
46. Nanomedicine  
47. Organ donation  
48. Organ transplant  
49. Pain management  
50. Parthenogenesis  

51. Patients' Bill of Rights 
52. Placebo  
53. Political abuse of psychiatry  
54. Population control  
55. Prescription drugs (prices in the US)  
56. Procreative beneficence  
57. Professional ethics  
58. Psychosurgery  
59. Quality of Life (Healthcare)  
60. Quaternary prevention  
61. Recreational drug use  
62. Reproductive rights  
63. Reprogenetics 
64. Sex reassignment therapy 
65. Sperm and eggs (donation) 
66. Stem cell research 
67. Suicide 
68. Surrogacy 
69. Three Parent Babies 
70. Transhumanism 
71. Transplant Trade 
72. Vaccination Controversy 
73. Xenotransfusion 
74. Xenotransplantation 
75. Yoga

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_rights
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_insemination
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_life
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_womb
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assisted_suicide
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biocentrism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biopiracy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biorisk
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_transfusion
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_modification
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain-computer_interface
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chimera_(genetics)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumcision
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloning
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confidentiality
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_records
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consent
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contraception
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birth_control
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cryonics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disability
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euthanasia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exorcism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faith_Healing
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feeding_tube
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_theft
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_theft
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetically_modified_food
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetically_modified_organism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genomics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Ape_Project
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_cloning
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_enhancement
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_experimentation_in_the_United_States
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_experimentation_in_the_United_States
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_genetic_engineering
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iatrogenesis
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infertility
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_extension
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_support
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lobotomy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_malpractice
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_research
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_torture
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mediation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_obligation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_status_of_animals
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanomedicine
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organ_donation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organ_transplant
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pain_management
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parthenogenesis
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patients%27_Bill_of_Rights
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Placebo
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_abuse_of_psychiatry
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_control
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prescription_drugs
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prescription_drug_prices_in_the_United_States
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Procreative_beneficence
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_ethics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychosurgery
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quality_of_Life_(Healthcare)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quaternary_prevention
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recreational_drug_use
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reproductive_rights
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reprogenetics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_reassignment_therapy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sperm_donation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egg_donation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stem_cell


       
 

Bangladesh Journal of Bioethics 2013; 4(2):1-8 

 

  

Most Productive Journals: There were total 1503 journals publishing a total of 2982 papers during 
the whole study period (2005-09). There were 593 Journals having one article each. 50% papers 
(1490) appeared in a total of 88 journals with an average of approximately 17 papers per journal. The 
rest of the papers were distributed among a total of 1415 with an average of 1 papers per journal. The 
top most journal was Blood with 321 papers followed by American Journal of Bioethics (81). 
 
 

 
 
 
Growth of Journals and Articles: Table below gives the number of Journals and Articles in the area 
of Bioethics Research. It suggests that both the journals and articles increase exponentially. The 
number of articles has increased from 243 to1522. Also the number of journals has increased from 
156 to 566 (2005-09). The figures clearly show that the exponential model fit the empirical data.  
 
Number of Articles and Journals in Bioethics Research 

Year No. of Journals Articles 
Average Growth of 
Articles in journals 

2005 156 243 64.19753086 

2006 222 368 60.32608696 

2007 245 373 65.68364611 

2008 314 476 65.96638655 

2009 566 1522 37.18791064 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
6 



       
 

Bangladesh Journal of Bioethics 2013; 4(2):1-8 

 

  

 
 
Multiple Authorship: An attempt had been made to study the co-authorship. Table below, gives the 
data on single and multiple authorship in the area of Bioethics Research for the period 2005-09. 
Above Figures clearly indicate that the percentage of papers with multiple authors significantly 
increased, indicating that the research was towards interdisciplinary in nature. 
 
 

Distribution of Single and >2 author Papers 
 
                      

Year # of one Author  #  of ≥ 2 Authors 

2005 93 150 

2006 186 182 

2007 206 167 

2008 249 227 

2009 1230 292 

 
 

 
 
 
Conclusion: While the roots of bioethics lay in philosophy, today‟s bioethics requires collaboration 
among many additional areas of research, including law, medicine, biology, genetics, environmental 
toxicology, public health, pharmaceuticals, stem cell research, biotechnology, politics, sociology and 
business. Bioethical dilemmas, once rare, now are commonplace, in part because new medical 



       
 

Bangladesh Journal of Bioethics 2013; 4(2):1-8 

 

  

technologies have outpaced our ability to understand their implications. The field of bioethics has 
addressed a broad swath of human inquiry, ranging from debates over the boundaries of life (e.g. 
abortion, euthanasia), Surrogacy to the allocation of scarce health care resources (e.g. organ 
donation, health care rationing) to the right to turn down medical care for religious or cultural reasons. 
Bioethicists often disagree among themselves over the precise limits of their discipline, debating 
whether the field should concern itself with the ethical evaluation of all questions involving biology and 
medicine, or only a subset of these some bioethicists would narrow ethical evaluation only to the 
morality of medical treatments or technological innovations, and the timing of medical treatment of 
humans. The literature survey has indicated that there is no comprehensive work has been done by 
any researcher on this topic. Therefore the present study would concentrate on the work being 
carried out by Indian R & D scientists vis-a-vis Global researchers.  
 
 
References: 

1. De Alba Ulloa. Difficulties of the negotiation process of the Convention for the Protection of 
Human Rights and Dignity of the Human Being with regard to the application of biology and 
medicine (and a call for its adhesion)]. J.Gac Med Mex 2012 May-Jun;148(3):307-20.  

2. Devaiah VH. Impact of bioethics on patentability of inventions. Indian J Med Ethics  2010 
Jan-Mar. 7(1):14-7. 

3. Byk C. Patenting human stem cells: an urgent need for a clarification. J Int Bioethique 2008 
Sep.19(3):105-19.125-6. 

 

 

 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
8 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euthanasia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organ_donation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organ_donation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organ_donation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technology
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22820368
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22820368
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22820368
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22820368
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20166289
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19244945

