Evidence and Human Genome Editing

In July, the United Kingdom's Nuffield Council on Bioethics issued a report on human genome editing in which it said that editing a human embryo's genome to reduce the possibility that the future child will inherit a genetic disorder could be ethically acceptable when certain conditions ar...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Maschke, Karen J. (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Interlibrary Loan:Interlibrary Loan for the Fachinformationsdienste (Specialized Information Services in Germany)
Published: 2018
In: The Hastings Center report
Year: 2018, Volume: 48, Issue: 5
Online Access: Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)

MARC

LEADER 00000naa a22000002c 4500
001 1937530132
003 DE-627
005 20251002055615.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 251002s2018 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
024 7 |a 10.1002/hast.924  |2 doi 
035 |a (DE-627)1937530132 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1937530132 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Maschke, Karen J.  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
245 1 0 |a Evidence and Human Genome Editing 
264 1 |c 2018 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a In July, the United Kingdom's Nuffield Council on Bioethics issued a report on human genome editing in which it said that editing a human embryo's genome to reduce the possibility that the future child will inherit a genetic disorder could be ethically acceptable when certain conditions are met: the intended use of genome-editing interventions secures and is consistent with the “welfare of the future person” and does not “increase disadvantage, discrimination or division in society.” Yet the Council noted that if current legal restrictions on the use of heritable genome-editing interventions were lifted, the interventions should be used only in the context of “well-designed and supervised studies” to ensure that they are safe and effective. Some people might contend that it is premature to talk about what kind of evidence—and how much—will be needed to gauge the safety and effectiveness of genome-editing interventions since the United Kingdom, the United States, and several other countries currently prohibit clinical trials that involve transferring into a woman an embryo whose genome was edited. Yet based on an analysis of evidentiary disputes involving several medical technologies (an analysis that I conducted with my Hastings colleague Michael Gusmano for a forthcoming book, Debating Modern Medical Technologies: The Politics of Safety, Effectiveness, and Patient Access), I suggest that now is the time to start the conversation about evidentiary standards for the use of genome editing in reproductive medicine. 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |a Hastings Center  |t The Hastings Center report  |d Malden, Mass. : Wiley, 1971  |g 48(2018), 5  |h Online-Ressource  |w (DE-627)341346551  |w (DE-600)2067369-3  |w (DE-576)258761822  |x 1552-146X  |7 nnas 
773 1 8 |g volume:48  |g year:2018  |g number:5 
856 4 0 |u https://doi.org/10.1002/hast.924  |x Resolving-System  |z lizenzpflichtig  |3 Volltext 
856 4 0 |u https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/hast.924  |x Verlag  |z lizenzpflichtig  |3 Volltext 
912 |a NOMM 
935 |a mteo 
951 |a AR 
ELC |a 1 
ITA |a 1  |t 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 4779656311 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1937530132 
LOK |0 005 20251002055615 
LOK |0 008 251002||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 035   |a (DE-Tue135)IxTheo#2025-09-26#79372A70CB3FC52E36FEE1B6492F8A4F89CCF74B 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-Tue135  |c DE-627  |d DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 935   |a ixrk  |a ixzs  |a zota  |a tiep 
ORI |a TA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw