No patent-no therapy: a matter of moral and legal consistency within the European Union regarding the use of human embryonic stem cells.

In the aftermath of the European Court of Justice's decision case of Brüstle v Greenpeace of October 2011 that patent claims encompassing human embryonic stem cells were patent-ineligible in the European Union on public order and morality grounds, a rash of stories has appeared predicting the destruction or exodus of human embryonic stem cells research. Irrespective of whether these predictions are justified, amazingly it has not been examined so far whether this decision has an implication on the justification of human embryonic stem cell-based therapies. Therefore, this article presents considerations about the logical link between that patent ruling and the justification of therapies based on human embryonic stem cells.