Switch to: Citations

Add references

You must login to add references.
  1. The Moral Imperative to Continue Gene Editing Research on Human Embryos.Julian Savulescu, Jonathan Pugh, Thomas Douglas & Chris Gyngell - 2015 - Protein Cell 6 (7):476–479.
    The publication of the first study to use gene editing techniques in human embryos (Liang et al., 2015) has drawn outrage from many in the scientific community. The prestigious scientific journals Nature and Science have published commentaries which call for this research to be strongly discouraged or halted all together (Lanphier et al., 2015; Baltimore et al., 2015). We believe this should be questioned. There is a moral imperative to continue this research.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   27 citations  
  • Islam and the four principles of medical ethics.Yassar Mustafa - 2014 - Journal of Medical Ethics 40 (7):479-483.
    The principles underpinning Islam's ethical framework applied to routine clinical scenarios remain insufficiently understood by many clinicians, thereby unfortunately permitting the delivery of culturally insensitive healthcare. This paper summarises the foundations of the Islamic ethical theory, elucidating the principles and methodology employed by the Muslim jurist in deriving rulings in the field of medical ethics. The four-principles approach, as espoused by Beauchamp and Childress, is also interpreted through the prism of Islamic ethical theory. Each of the four principles is investigated (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations  
  • CRISPR-Cas Gene Editing to Cure Serious Diseases: Treat the Patient, Not the Germ Line.Ante S. Lundberg & Rodger Novak - 2015 - American Journal of Bioethics 15 (12):38-40.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  • Human Germline CRISPR-Cas Modification: Toward a Regulatory Framework.Niklaus H. Evitt, Shamik Mascharak & Russ B. Altman - 2015 - American Journal of Bioethics 15 (12):25-29.
    CRISPR germline editing therapies hold unprecedented potential to eradicate hereditary disorders. However, the prospect of altering the human germline has sparked a debate over the safety, efficacy, and morality of CGETs, triggering a funding moratorium by the NIH. There is an urgent need for practical paths for the evaluation of these capabilities. We propose a model regulatory framework for CGET research, clinical development, and distribution. Our model takes advantage of existing legal and regulatory institutions but adds elevated scrutiny at each (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   18 citations