Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Ethical Arguments Concerning Human-Animal Chimera Research: A Systematic Review.Koko Kwisda, Lucie White & Dietmar Hübner - 2020 - BMC Medical Ethics 21:1-14.
    The burgeoning field of biomedical research involving the mixture of human and animal materials has attracted significant ethical controversy. Due to the many dimensions of potential ethical conflict involved in this type of research, and the wide variety of research projects under discussion, it is difficult to obtain an overview of the ethical debate. This paper attempts to remedy this by providing a systematic review of ethical reasons in academic publications on human-animal chimera research. We conducted a systematic review of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  • Human dignity and the creation of human–nonhuman chimeras.César Palacios-González - 2015 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 18 (4):487-499.
    In this work I present a detailed critique of the dignity-related arguments that have been advanced against the creation of human–nonhuman chimeras that could possess human-like mental capacities. My main claim is that the arguments so far advanced are incapable of grounding a principled objection against the creation of such creatures. I conclude that these arguments have one, or more, of the following problems: they confuse the ethical assessment of the creation of chimeras with the ethical assessment of how such (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • The ethics of killing human/great-ape chimeras for their organs: a reply to Shaw et al.César Palacios-González - 2016 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 19 (2):215-225.
    The aim of this paper is to critically examine David Shaw, Wybo Dondorp, and Guido de Wert’s arguments in favour of the procurement of human organs from human/nonhuman-primate chimeras, specifically from great-ape/human chimeras. My main claim is that their arguments fail and are in need of substantial revision. To prove this I first introduce the topic, and then reconstruct Shaw et al.’s position and arguments. Next, I show that Shaw et al.: (1) failed to properly apply the subsidiarity and proportionality (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations