当前位置: X-MOL 学术BMC Med. Ethics › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Is selecting better than modifying? An investigation of arguments against germline gene editing as compared to preimplantation genetic diagnosis.
BMC Medical Ethics ( IF 3.0 ) Pub Date : 2019-11-21 , DOI: 10.1186/s12910-019-0411-9
Alix Lenia V Hammerstein 1 , Matthias Eggel 1 , Nikola Biller-Andorno 1
Affiliation  

BACKGROUND Recent scientific advances in the field of gene editing have led to a renewed discussion on the moral acceptability of human germline modifications. Gene editing methods can be used on human embryos and gametes in order to change DNA sequences that are associated with diseases. Modifying the human germline, however, is currently illegal in many countries but has been suggested as a 'last resort' option in some reports. In contrast, preimplantation genetic (PGD) diagnosis is now a well-established practice within reproductive medicine. Both methods can be used to prevent children from being born with severe genetic diseases. MAIN TEXT This paper focuses on four moral concerns raised in the debate about germline gene editing (GGE) and applies them to the practice of PGD for comparison: Violation of human dignity, disrespect of the autonomy and the physical integrity of the future child, discrimination of people living with a disability and the fear of slippery slope towards immoral usage of the technology, e.g. designing children for specific third party interests. Our analysis did not reveal any fundamental differences with regard to the four concerns. CONCLUSION We argue that with regard to the four arguments analyzed in this paper germline gene editing should be considered morally (at least) as acceptable as the selection of genomes on the basis of PGD. However, we also argue that any application of GGE in reproductive medicine should be put on hold until thorough and comprehensive laws have been implemented to prevent the abuse of GGE for non-medical enhancement.

中文翻译:

选择比修改更好吗?与植入前基因诊断相比,反对种系基因编辑的争论的调查。

背景技术基因编辑领域的最新科学进展引发了关于人类种系修饰的道德可接受性的新讨论。基因编辑方法可用于人类胚胎和配子,以改变与疾病相关的 DNA 序列。然而,目前修改人类种系在许多国家都是非法的,但在一些报告中被建议作为“最后的手段”。相比之下,植入前遗传学(PGD)诊断现已成为生殖医学领域的一种成熟实践。这两种方法都可以用来预防孩子出生时患有严重的遗传病。正文本文重点关注生殖系基因编辑(GGE)争论中提出的四个道德问题,并将其应用于PGD实践中进行比较:侵犯人的尊严、不尊重未来孩子的自主权和身体完整性、歧视以及对技术的不道德使用的恐惧,例如为特定的第三方利益设计儿童。我们的分析没有揭示出这四个问题有任何根本差异。结论 我们认为,关于本文分析的四个论点,种系基因编辑在道德上(至少)应该被认为与基于 PGD 的基因组选择一样可接受。然而,我们也认为,在实施彻底、全面的法律以防止 GGE 被滥用于非医学增强之前,GGE 在生殖医学中的任何应用都应暂停。
更新日期:2020-04-22
down
wechat
bug