Genome Editing, Ethics, and Politics

Gabel, Isabel; Moreno, Jonathan D.

doi:10.1001/amajethics.2019.1105

Cited by 12 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 2 publications

(1 reference statement)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition, we found no significant relation between participants' belief updating and their political affiliation nor the strength of their political beliefs (i.e., how extreme their political beliefs were, independent of political affiliation). Whereas previous work has found associations between political beliefs, metacognitive sensitivity, and belief updating (Rollwage et al 2018), the topic of our study (human gene editing) involved a largely nonpartisan issue without current political controversy (Gabel and Moreno 2019). In addition, some of these studies have measured radical political beliefs, like dogmatic beliefs and rightwing authoritarianism, whereas we measured political affiliation using a standard Likert scale ranging from very liberal to very conservative.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Thinking about Believing: Can Metacognitive Reflection Encourage Belief Updating?

O’Leary,

Fletcher

2024

J. Intell.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

People often cling to their beliefs even in the face of counterevidence. The current study explored metacognitive reflection as a potential driver for belief updating. In a randomized controlled experiment (n = 155), participants rated their degree of agreement with a statement regarding genetic modification in humans. Following this, participants were presented with a passage containing an argument counter to their indicated belief. Participants in the metacognition condition were asked to deeply reflect on the ways in which the passage was similar to or different from their current beliefs. Participants in the control condition were asked to engage in more shallow reflection on the composition of the passage. After reflecting on the counterevidence, participants were asked to again rate their agreement with the statement regarding human gene modification. Both groups updated their initial beliefs to be more consistent with the presented counterevidence. Although greater belief updating was observed in those who metacognitively reflected on the passage, this effect did not reach significance (p = .055). These findings suggest that reflecting on counterevidence has the potential to encourage belief updating, regardless of whether that reflection is metacognitive in nature, and provide promise for future work investigating the role of metacognition in belief updating.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Thinking about Believing: Can Metacognitive Reflection Encourage Belief Updating?

O’Leary,

Fletcher

2024

J. Intell.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In China, to reduce unethical or illegal uses of emerging technologies, some argue that top-down regulation is crucial, i.e., that the governance of research should be under the jurisdiction of the State Council (Lei et al 2019 ), and quick legal action has been taken by the legislature (Cao and Jia 2021 ). In the USA, because gene editing is a topic more remote from the long-standing abortion debate and has received less attention, its governance is likely to be undertaken by national and international scientific bodies, in collaboration with regulatory agencies, rather than by legislative or executive branches, as has recently been the case (Gabel and Moreno 2019 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stakeholder Involvement in the Governance of Human Genome Editing in Japan

Aikyo

Kogetsu

Kato

2023

ABR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Genome editing is a technology that can accurately and efficiently modify the genome of organisms, including the human genome. Although human genome editing (HGE) has many benefits, it also involves technical risks and ethical, legal, and social issues. Thus, the pros and cons of using this technology have been actively debated since 2015. Notably, the research community has taken an interest in the issue and has discussed it internationally. However, for the governance of HGE, the roles of government agencies and the general public are also important for an effective regulatory system. Here, we examine the roles of the research community, government, and public in the governance of HGE through an analysis of discussions in the Japanese Expert Panel on Bioethics. During the discussion of the research ethics review system, the professionalism of the research community and the pros and cons of state oversight have become issues for debate. Furthermore, through an examination of the overall policy-making process, three stakeholders are clearly involved in the governance of emerging medical technologies in the Expert Panel on Bioethics, a discussion forum established by government agencies. The contrast among these roles provides insight into the positive roles of government agencies and the research community and the conditions under which these roles are played. We also note that there are diverse actors in the public, which may have an impact on their participation. Our results may serve as a guide for countries and organizations to establish governance on emerging medical technologies.

show abstract

“…As a potential cure for a wide variety of infectious diseases that are not amenable to traditional clinical management, gene therapy is being studied [31]. Infectious disease genome editing approaches can be classified into three broad categories: (I) nucleic acid-based gene therapies, (ii) protein strategies such as trans-dominant negative proteins and (iii) immunotherapeutic advances involving genetic vaccines [32]. It is also essential to concurrently use combinations of the above methods to inhibit several stages of the cycle of viral life.…”

Section: Gene Therapy For Infectious Diseasesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Genome therapy for somatic cells is accepted by a large part of the scientific community, especially in cases of serious disorders such as cystic fibrosis [40,41]. To track their growth and wellbeing, follow-up on children born after GGT would be important [48]. There is a controversy about how long it is appropriate to track children, with views varying from a few years or even decades, or even centuries to generations [6,32].…”

Section: Ethical Consideration In Gene Therapymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Gene Therapy Approaches

Ahmed

Saadi²

2021

QAJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Gene therapy can be described broadly as the transfer of genetic material to control a disease or at least to enhance a patient's clinical status. The transformation of viruses into genetic shuttles is one of the core principles of gene therapy, which will introduce the gene of interest into the target tissue and cells. To do this, safe strategies have been invented, using many viral and non-viral vector delivery. Two major methods have emerged: modification in vivo and modification ex vivo. For gene therapeutic approaches which are focused on lifelong expression of the therapeutic gene, retrovirus, adenovirus, adeno-associated viruses are acceptable. Non-viral vectors are much less successful than viral vectors, but because of their low immune responses and their broad therapeutic DNA ability, they have advantages. The addition of viral functions such as receptor-mediated uptake and nuclear translocation of DNA may eventually lead to the development of an artificial virus in order to improve the role of non-viral vectors. For human use in genetic conditions, cancers and acquired illnesses, gene transfer techniques have been allowed. The ideal delivery vehicle has not been identified, although the accessible vector systems are capable of transporting genes in vivo into cells. Therefore, only with great caution can the present viral vectors be used in human beings and further progress in the production of vectors is required. Current progresses in our understanding of gene therapy approaches and their delivery technology, as well as the victors used to deliver therapeutic genes, are the primary goals of this review. For that reason, a literature search on PubMed and Google Scholar was carried out using different keywords.

show abstract

Genome Editing, Ethics, and Politics

Cited by 12 publications

References 2 publications

Thinking about Believing: Can Metacognitive Reflection Encourage Belief Updating?

Thinking about Believing: Can Metacognitive Reflection Encourage Belief Updating?

Stakeholder Involvement in the Governance of Human Genome Editing in Japan

Gene Therapy Approaches

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About