Epigenetics and Future Generations
Recent evidence of intergenerational epigenetic programming of disease risk broadens the scope of public health preventive interventions to future generations, i.e. non existing people. Due to the transmission of epigenetic predispositions, lifestyles such as smoking or unhealthy diet might affect t...
| Опубликовано в: : | Bioethics |
|---|---|
| Главные авторы: | ; ; |
| Формат: | Электронный ресурс Статья |
| Язык: | Английский |
| Проверить наличие: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Загрузка...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Опубликовано: |
Wiley-Blackwell
[2015]
|
| В: |
Bioethics
Год: 2015, Том: 29, Выпуск: 8, Страницы: 580-587 |
| Индексация IxTheo: | NCH Медицинская этика |
| Другие ключевые слова: | B
intergenerational justice
B non-identity problem B Epigenetics |
| Online-ссылка: |
Volltext (Verlag) Volltext (doi) |
| Итог: | Recent evidence of intergenerational epigenetic programming of disease risk broadens the scope of public health preventive interventions to future generations, i.e. non existing people. Due to the transmission of epigenetic predispositions, lifestyles such as smoking or unhealthy diet might affect the health of populations across several generations. While public policy for the health of future generations can be justified through impersonal considerations, such as maximizing aggregate well-being, in this article we explore whether there are rights-based obligations supervening on intergenerational epigenetic programming despite the non-identity argument, which challenges this rationale in case of policies that affect the number and identity of future people. We propose that rights based obligations grounded in the interests of non-existing people might fall upon existing people when generations overlap. In particular, if environmental exposure in F0 (i.e. existing people) will affect the health of F2 (i.e. non-existing people) through epigenetic programming, then F1 (i.e. existing and overlapping with both F0 and F2) might face increased costs to address F2's condition in the future: this might generate obligations upon F0 from various distributive principles, such as the principle of equal opportunity for well being. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1467-8519 |
| Второстепенные работы: | Enthalten in: Bioethics
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1111/bioe.12150 |