Only a few weeks into the Covid 19 pandemic of 2020, the disciplinary unruliness of the outbreak is obvious. A zoonosis, this Corona virus is thought to have originated in or near a seafood market in Wuhan, spreading globally due to the highly contagious nature of respiratory exchange among the human population. At its origins, the outbreak bridges public health to the food system. As significant of the virulence is, the socio-economic consequences of public health measures to curtail human-to-human transmission loom large. Some rebound back to the food system, as grocery stores have become sites of panic, restaurant workers are among the most severely effected in economic terms, and measures to limit travel across national borders have ignited fears among temporary and undocumented workers, many of whom are essential to the productivity of the agriculture in the United States. The disciplinary organization of American universities has left us poorly prepared to learn from these events. On the one hand, the social scientists and humanities scholars who attend to social, economic and ethical dimensions of the public health crisis are ensconced in medical schools. To their credit, they have developed a robust interdisciplinary approach to their research. Economic drivers and impacts are observed with close attention to issues of structure and institutional organization, and philosophers attend to the ethical issues that pervade virtually every dimension of health care. All are more or less comfortable with the label “bioethics” because that is the way that medically trained specialists refer to a research domain that they have come to regard as an essential complement to their biologically based science. On the other hand, social science research on the food system is almost wholly disconnected from bioethics, with only a handful for researchers attending to links between diet and health. Even they betray little cognizance that food comes from farms, while scholars who study the food system are dispersed across schools that do and do not have agricultural programs, and balkanized within departments of economics, sociology, anthropology and geography. Only the geographers appear to be taking an interdisciplinary approach, and even they seem reluctant to have much truck with the philosophers. For their part, philosophers squandered the early start afforded by Richard P. Haynes, founding editor of Agriculture and Human Values, to become obsessed with moral vegetarianism to the exclusion of every other issue in food ethics. Is there any remedy? I have suggested One Bioethics (Thompson and List 2015; Thompson 2015, 2017). The idea borrows from One Health, an attempt to build better bridges between human and veterinary medical communities. The potential for zoonotic outbreaks is a centerpiece of One Health, so we can expect to be hearing more and more about it as the immediate crisis fades and learning from it comes to the foreground. Might it be possible for social scientists and humanists who work on food and agriculture to jump on this bandwagon? Could bioethicists in medical schools learn something from social and ethical research on the food system? Could those of us who study food learn something from bioethics? I hope that the answer to all these questions is yes.

中文翻译：

---

Covid 19 的一种生物伦理学？

2020 年 Covid 19 大流行仅几周后，疫情的不守纪律就很明显了。一种人畜共患病，这种冠状病毒被认为起源于武汉的一个海鲜市场或附近，由于人群之间呼吸交换的高度传染性，它在全球范围内传播。疫情的起源是公共卫生与食品系统之间的桥梁。与毒力一样重要的是，减少人际传播的公共卫生措施的社会经济后果迫在眉睫。一些人重新回到食品系统，因为杂货店已成为恐慌场所，餐馆工人在经济方面受到的影响最为严重，限制跨国旅行的措施引发了临时工和无证工人的担忧，其中许多对美国农业的生产力至关重要。美国大学的纪律组织让我们没有准备好从这些事件中学习。一方面，关注公共卫生危机的社会、经济和伦理层面的社会科学家和人文学者被安置在医学院。值得称赞的是，他们已经为他们的研究开发了一种强大的跨学科方法。密切关注结构和机构组织问题，观察经济驱动因素和影响，哲学家关注几乎遍及医疗保健各个方面的伦理问题。所有人都或多或少对“生物伦理学”这个标签感到满意，因为这是受过医学培训的专家提到的研究领域的方式，他们已经开始将其视为其生物科学的重要补充。另一方面，关于食品系统的社会科学研究几乎完全与生物伦理学脱节，只有少数研究人员关注饮食与健康之间的联系。即使他们也很少意识到食物来自农场，而研究食物系统的学者分散在有和没有农业项目的学校中，并在经济学、社会学、人类学和地理学系内各不相同。只有地理学家似乎采取了跨学科的方法，甚至他们似乎也不愿意与哲学家有太多的关系。就他们而言，哲学家们浪费了《农业与人类价值观》的创始编辑理查德·海恩斯 (Richard P. Haynes) 提供的早期开端，沉迷于道德素食主义，而忽视了食品伦理中的所有其他问题。有什么补救措施吗？我建议过一种生物伦理学（Thompson 和 List 2015；Thompson 2015、2017）。这个想法借鉴了 One Health，试图在人类和兽医医学界之间建立更好的桥梁。人畜共患病爆发的可能性是 One Health 的核心内容，因此随着当前危机的消退并从中吸取教训，我们可以期待听到越来越多的消息。从事粮食和农业工作的社会科学家和人文主义者是否有可能加入这一潮流？医学院的生物伦理学家能否从对食品系统的社会和伦理研究中学到一些东西？我们这些研究食物的人能从生物伦理学中学到一些东西吗？我希望所有这些问题的答案都是肯定的。