To the editor

In some way, the article “Physician proposals could cost biotechs thousands,” recently published in Nature Biotechnology1, accomplished exactly what the American Society of Clinical Pathologists (ASCP) requested of the US Secretary's Advisory Committee on Genetic Testing—that is, to open a dialogue on the issue of patenting laboratory test methods. Unfortunately, that is where the understanding ends.

In its statement, the ASCP suggested that there are several alternatives that may help alleviate potential problems with the patenting of laboratory test methods. The society did not make any definitive recommendations, but rather suggested ideas that could be further explored. It appears from the last paragraph that we have been successful; ASCP has been participating in a dialogue with the Biotechnology Industry Organization, the Genetic Alliance, the Association of Molecular Pathology, and other groups in the hope of finding some common ground on the subject.

It is our understanding that the “freelance writer working in San Diego,” who penned the article, is actually the director of intellectual property for Sequenom. If in fact this is the case, this information should be disclosed to your readers.