We still use HeLa cells in the lab today. They're great models for testing adeno associated virus infectivity. It never feels right that we're using these cells at my company to do research with potential commercial applications but while a lot of people will make money off of license fees etc is we succeed, the family of the original cell donor won't. At last with HeLa, if I recall correctly, the cells themselves weren't heavily monetized, but there are some cases of cells late down the line where the patient didnt see a penny, but the researcher patented/made proprietary the cell line and charged significant license fees for it. That strikes me as even more questionable.
I wonder what the ethical right thing to do is in the case of, for example, an induced pluripotent stem cell line, or an immortalized line from a patient with a particular genome we want to study. We pay for the license for the immortalization process or stem-cell induction process, but we dont really pay for the genome, even though the reason we spend thousands of dollars immortalizing that particular cell line is because that patient has a disease we want to study and cure, and we want cells with that same genetic sequence to study.
I wonder what the ethical right thing to do is in the case of, for example, an induced pluripotent stem cell line, or an immortalized line from a patient with a particular genome we want to study. We pay for the license for the immortalization process or stem-cell induction process, but we dont really pay for the genome, even though the reason we spend thousands of dollars immortalizing that particular cell line is because that patient has a disease we want to study and cure, and we want cells with that same genetic sequence to study.