Commodification (or commoditization) happens when something is treated purely as a commodity—a product that can be bought, sold, or traded. This concept often has negative implications, especially when applied to the human body and its parts. As a result, there’s a concern that transactions involving biobanked samples might fall into this category. But is this concern justified?
This question is especially important when it comes to the supply of clinical samples to industry. This supply is essential because biotech and pharma companies need the samples for vital research that may lead to new therapies, diagnostics, and vaccines. Unfortunately, many factors limit the supply of biosamples from academic or hospital biobanks to industry researchers. One of the more important factors is ethical concern about commercial transactions involving human tissue.
Concerns About Commodification
Some people worry that commercial transactions involving human biosamples might be degrading or disrespectful. Specifically, the main argument is that human body parts or tissues should not be treated as mere objects or commodities. Otherwise, treating them this way could lead to objectification and commodification.
This concern is explored in a 2005 article by Steven Wilkinson, titled Biomedical Research and the Commercial Exploitation of Human Tissue. Wilkinson argues that while bodies and body parts are indeed objects, they are not just ordinary objects. Instead, they have a value that goes beyond everyday items like cans of baked beans or lumps of coal. Their special value comes from their connection to people. When someone treats a tissue sample as just an object, they commoditize the sample by ignoring this personal connection.
Wilkinson then asks: What does it mean to treat a tissue sample as if it weren’t connected to a person? He suggests two main ways this could happen: (a) using the sample without the person’s valid consent, and (b) doing something with it that could harm the person.
Given these concerns, is there a real risk that commercial transactions involving human biosamples could lead to such harms? Fortunately, professionally managed biobanks implement protective measures like informed consent and IRB oversight to ensure that donors receive the respect and protection they deserve.
Moreover, professional biobanks also maintain traceability throughout a sample’s lifecycle, which preserves the personal connection to the sample. This process helps ensure that samples are used in accordance with informed consent and IRB decisions. Consequently, maintaining tracebility acts as a vital safeguard against the commodification of samples.
The Importance of Traceability
While concerns about commodification in biobanking are valid, the established ethical guidelines and practices within professional biobanks—such as informed consent, IRB oversight, and traceability—provide strong protections. In conclusion, these measures help ensure that human biosamples are treated with the respect they deserve, preserving their intrinsic value beyond mere commodities. Therefore, the risk of commodification in this context appears to be well-managed and minimal, as long as traceability is maintained throughout a sample’s lifecycle.
Other posts on this Biosample Hub blog include:
- Why Academic / Hospital Biobanks Should Provide Biosamples to Industry
- Ensuring Public Support For Biobank Cooperation With Industry
- The Main Actors Providing Biosamples To Industry
- Biosample Needs of Different Industry Players
- Acceptable Transactions In Biobanking
- What is Commodification?
- Why Biobank Access Policies Should Be Publicly Available
- Biospecimen Provenance: What Researchers Need To Know
