I've read that the possibility to patent genes led to the explosion of the field some years back. Are there such positive examples discussed in the book?
They led to an explosion of patents on genes, not to an explosion of applicable research. The research would have happened anyway, maybe a bit later or maybe not as patent directed.
It's the "maybe a bit later" part I wished I'd find better researched. I remember the source I found was pretty trustworthy, but still just one data point.
