Although God, or nature, created man, a 20th-century scientist might soon own the copyright or patent to the genetic blueprint used in the process.
The possibility arises with proposals to revise laws covering the rights to new discoveries in genetic engineering.
The question of how far proprietary rights should be allowed to extend over natural products of mankind's genes is about to assume a larger dimension.
It comes in the wake of the largest research project ever undertaken in biology and started in the United States, Europe and Japan. The goal is to produce a complete map of all human genes.
The venture, which is compared with landing man on the Moon, will cost hundreds of millions of pounds. The potential reward for producing the map of the human "genome" is enormous.
It contains the genes that control everything from cancer to ageing. About three thousand hereditary diseases are known to be caused by faulty genes.
Cancer researchers are exploring the genetic changes that lead to the disease. The European Commission wants all member countries to adjust patent regulations by the end of 1991 to accommodate the changes.
The new rules are contained in a draft directive, The Legal Protection of Biotechnological Invention. The rules would give an individual or organization "ownership to plants and animals, resulting from genetic engineering".
In the past five years, the European Commission has wrestled with the economic, social and ethical issues raised by the genetic engineering of materials. A human gene can be spliced into a micro-organism to stimulate it to produce a specific natural substance.
Surveys on European public attitudes to genetic research show a small majority: 35 per cent, think the risks are unacceptable, and 33 per cent believe it worthwhile.
Adaptation of plants and animals has been excluded so far from patent law. Hence, recent attempts to use the regulations by drug companies and new biotechnology research firms to protect their inventions have ended in a quagmire.
Crucial battles are being fought in the European and American courts over rival claims to genetic engineering developments.
An indication of the commercial importance is a contest between Britain's Wellcome Foundation and Genentech, a leading US biotechnology research laboratory, over prior claim to a genetic method for making TPA or Tissue Plasminogen Activator.
Employing genetic engineering, TPA is available on a large scale and promises a big advance in heart treatment.
However, the pressure to resolve issues of ownership have increased with the first patent for a genetically engineered mouse which broadly claims to cover "any species of transgenic non-human mammal", including primates. It was awarded to Dr Philip Leder and Dr Timothy Stewart, of the Harvard Medical School.
The scientists have created what is in effect a mouse that is highly cancer sensitive. They introduced an oncogene into the embryo at an early stage after conception, so ensuring that the gene would be present in all the tissues when the animal developed.
The research was sponsored by Du Pont, the drug company, which holds the right to the patent. The genetically engineered mouse could be used to test systems, including those designed to evaluate cancer-causing agents, substances that encourage growth of tumours and drugs to prevent or treat cancer.
Another patent involving genetic engineering has been granted to Professor Myron Essex and Dr Tun-Hou Lee, also of Harvard University, for part of the Aids virus to cover a molecule known as GP120. Researchers believe it is the key to new vaccines for Aids.
