Galasso (2024) provides a strong critique of precision medicine research initiatives regarding their potential for the exclusion of populations based on upstream and downstream factors with “Genomi...

Dr. Galasso’s (2024) insightful article expands the ongoing debate on the utility and equity of precision medicine in public and population health. The initiatives mentioned, Genomics England and t...

In their target article, Galasso (2024) highlights the limitations of upstream inclusion in precision medicine research to produce downstream benefits to participants and proposes precision public...

Biomedicine in recent decades has been defined by an increasing tendency to turn social problems into biomedical questions. Precision or personalized health initiatives have gained attention due to...

There are compelling scientific, political, historical, legal, and ethical reasons why the All of Us research program participants should reflect the population of the United States. Many commentat...

Galasso (2024) shares findings from narrative analyses of relevant constituting material of and interviews with leaders in two national precision medicine research (PMR) programs: 100KGP of Genomic...

In her paper, Galasso contends that transitioning precision medicine from its current emphasis on healthcare benefits, to a focus on precision public health, may help address the equity concerns th...

The inclusion of members of structurally marginalized communities in data-intensive innovation initiatives, such as precision medicine projects, is an urgent contemporary issue. On the one hand, th...

Galasso (2024) helpfully puts her finger on what is perhaps the most troubling feature of precision medicine research today: Champions of the science are targeting communities of color and other ma...

Galasso (2024) reiterates the problem of medical research being grounded on data from people with European ancestry and subsequently describes efforts made by the All of Us Research Program in the...

In the article, “Precision Medicine for Whom? Public Health Outputs from “Genomics England” and “All of Us” to Make Up for Upstream and Downstream Exclusion,” Galasso focuses on how marginalized pe...

Galasso calls for “the actualization of the public health potential of precision medicine….as the best realistic contribution to health equity” (Galasso 2024, 83). Unfortunately, this is wishful th...

This paper problematises the notions of public or common good as weighed against individual sovereignty in the context of medical research by focusing on genetic research. We propose the notion of collective good as the good of the particular collective in which the research was conducted. We conducted documentary and interview-based research with participant representatives and research leaders concerned with participant involvement in leading genetic research projects and around two recent genetic data controversies: the case of the UK Wellcome Sanger (...) Institute, accused of planning unauthorised commercialisation of African DNA samples, and the case of the company Genuity Science, which planned genetic research on brain tumour samples in Ireland with no explicit patient consent. We advocate for greater specificity in circumscribing the collective to which genetic research relates and for greater efforts in including representatives of this collective as research coleaders in order to enable a more inclusive framing of the good arising from such research. Such community-based participant cogovernance and coleadership in genetic research is vital especially when minorities or vulnerable groups are involved, and it centrally requires community capacity building to help collectives articulate their own notions of the collective good. (shrink)