Results for 'CRISPR'

35 found
Order:
  1. CRISPR as a Driving Force: The Model T of Biotechnology.Carlos Mariscal & Angel Petropanagos - 2016 - Monash Bioethics Review 34 (2):1-16.
    The CRISPR system for gene editing can break, repair, and replace targeted sections of DNA. Although CRISPR gene editing has important therapeutic potential, it raises several ethical concerns. Some bioethicists worry CRISPR is a prelude to a dystopian future, while others maintain it should not be feared because it is analogous to past biotechnologies. In the scientific literature, CRISPR is often discussed as a revolutionary technology. In this paper we unpack the framing of CRISPR as (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  2. Enter CRISPR: Jennifer Doudna's Autobiographical Assessment of the Science and Ethics of CRISPR/Cas9.Hub Zwart - 2018 - Ethics in Biology, Engineering and Medicine 9 (1):59-76.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  3. Artifishial: Naturalness and the CRISPR-salmon.Hannah Winther - 2024 - Agriculture and Human Values:1-12.
    One of the reasons why GMOs have met public resistance in the past is that they are perceived as “unnatural”. The basis for this claim has, in part, to do with crossing species boundaries, which is considered morally objectionable. The emergence of CRISPR is sometimes argued to be an ethical game-changer in this regard since it does not require the insertion of foreign genes. Based on an empirical bioethics study including individual interviews and focus groups with laypeople and other (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  4. “Editing”: A Productive Metaphor for Regulating CRISPR.Ben Merriman - 2015 - American Journal of Bioethics 15 (12):62-64.
    The metaphor of “gene editing” has been employed widely in popular discussions of CRISPR technology. The editing metaphor obscures the physical mechanism of action in CRISPR techniques, and understates the present frequency of off-target effects. However, the editing metaphor may be a useful means to think about approaches to regulating the future use of CRISPR. Conceiving of CRISPR as an information technology recalls the highly computational, information-oriented context of genomic research in which CRISPR has emerged. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  5. The trust game CRISPR for human germline editing unsettles scientists and society.Matthias Braun & Darian Meacham - 2019 - EMBO Reports 20 (2).
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  6. Procreative Beneficence and Genetic Enhancement.Walter Veit - 2018 - Kriterion - Journal of Philosophy 32 (1):75-92.
    Imagine a world where everyone is healthy, intelligent, long living and happy. Intuitively this seems wonderful albeit unrealistic. However, recent scienti c breakthroughs in genetic engineering, namely CRISPR/Cas bring the question into public discourse, how the genetic enhancement of humans should be evaluated morally. In 2001, when preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) and in vitro fertilisation (IVF), enabled parents to select between multiple embryos, Julian Savulescu introduced the principle of procreative bene cence (PPB), stating that parents have the obligations to (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   19 citations  
  7. Genetic Protection Modifications: Moving Beyond the Binary Distinction Between Therapy and Enhancement for Human Genome Editing.Rasmus Bjerregaard Mikkelsen, Henriette Reventlow S. Frederiksen, Mickey Gjerris, Bjørn Holst, Poul Hyttel, Yonglun Luo, Kristine Freude & Peter Sandøe - 2019 - CRISPR Journal 2 (6):362-369.
    Current debate and policy surrounding the use of genetic editing in humans often relies on a binary distinction between therapy and human enhancement. In this paper, we argue that this dichotomy fails to take into account perhaps the most significant potential uses of CRISPR-Cas9 gene editing in humans. We argue that genetic treatment of sporadic Alzheimer’s disease, breast- and ovarian-cancer causing BRCA1/2 mutations and the introduction of HIV resistance in humans should be considered within a new category of genetic (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  8. Can reproductive genetic manipulation save lives?G. Owen Schaefer - 2020 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy (3):381-386.
    It has recently been argued that reproductive genetic manipulation technologies like mitochondrial replacement and germline CRISPR modifications cannot be said to save anyone’s life because, counterfactually, no one would suffer more or die sooner absent the intervention. The present article argues that, on the contrary, reproductive genetic manipulations may be life-saving (and, from this, have therapeutic value) under an appropriate population health perspective. As such, popular reports of reproductive genetic manipulations potentially saving lives or preventing disease are not necessarily (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  9. Improving the justice‐based argument for conducting human gene editing research to cure sickle cell disease.Berman Chan - 2019 - Bioethics 34 (2):200-202.
    In a recent article, Marilyn Baffoe-Bonnie offers three arguments for conducting CRISPR/Cas9 biotechnology research to cure sickle-cell disease (SCD) based on addressing historical and current injustices in SCD research and care. I show that her second and third arguments suffer from roughly the same defect, which is that they really argue for something else rather than for conducting CRISPR/Cas9 research in particular. For instance, the second argument argues that conducting this gene therapy research would improve the relationship between (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  10. Resisting the Temptation of Perfection.Joseph Tham - 2017 - The National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly 17 (1):51-62.
    With the advance of CRISPR technology, parents will be tempted to create superior offspring who are healthier, smarter, and stronger. In addition to the fact that many of these procedures are considered immoral for Catholics, they could change human nature in radical and possibly disastrous ways. This article focuses on the question of human perfectionism. First, by considering the relationship between human nature and technology, it analyzes whether such advances can improve human nature in addition to curing diseases. Next, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  11. When Extinction Is Warranted: Invasive Species, Suppression-Drives and the Worst-Case Scenario.Ann C. Thresher - 2022 - Ethics, Policy and Environment 25 (2):132-152.
    Most current techniques to deal with invasive species are ineffective or have highly damaging side effects. To this end suppression-drives based on clustered regularly inter-spaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR/Cas9) have been touted as a potential silver bullet for the problem, allowing for a highly focused, humane and cost-effective means of removing a target species from an environment. Suppression-drives come with serious risks, however, such that the precautionary principle seems to warrant us not deploying this technology. The focus of this (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  12. Reproductive genome editing interventions are therapeutic, sometimes.César Palacios-González - 2021 - Bioethics 35 (6):557-562.
    In this paper I argue that some human reproductive genome editing interventions can be therapeutic in nature, and thus that it is false that all such interventions just create healthy individuals. I do this by showing that the conditions established by a therapy definition are met by certain reproductive genome editing interventions. I then defend this position against two objections: (a) reproductive genome editing interventions do not attain one of the two conditions for something to be a therapy, and (b) (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  13. Can ‘eugenics’ be defended?Walter Veit, J. Anomaly, N. Agar, P. Singer, D. Fleischman & F. Minerva - 2021 - Bioethics Review 39 (1):60–67.
    In recent years, bioethical discourse around the topic of ‘genetic enhancement’ has become increasingly politicized. We fear there is too much focus on the semantic question of whether we should call particular practices and emerging bio-technologies such as CRISPR ‘eugenics’, rather than the more important question of how we should view them from the perspective of ethics and policy. Here, we address the question of whether ‘eugenics’ can be defended and how proponents and critics of enhancement should engage with (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  14. Eugenic Thinking.Robert A. Wilson - 2018 - Philosophy, Theory, and Practice in Biology 10.
    Projects of human improvement take both individual and intergenerational forms. The biosciences provide many technologies, including prenatal screening and the latest gene editing techniques, such as CRISPR, that have been viewed as providing the means to human improvement across generations. But who is fit to furnish the next generation? Historically, eugenics epitomizes the science-based attempt to improve human society through distinguishing kinds of people and then implementing social policies—from immigration restriction to sexual sterilization and euthanasia—that influence and even direct (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  15. Reproductive Embryo Editing: Attending to Justice.Inmaculada De Melo-Martín - 2022 - Hastings Center Report 52 (4):26-33.
    The use of genome embryo editing tools in reproduction is often touted as a way to ensure the birth of healthy and genetically related children. Many would agree that this is a worthy goal. The purpose of this paper is to argue that, if we are concerned with justice, accepting such goal as morally appropriate commits one to rejecting the development of embryo editing for reproductive purposes. This is so because safer and more effective means exist that can allow many (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  16. Can ‘eugenics’ be defended?Francesca Minerva, Diana S. Fleischman, Peter Singer, Nicholas Agar, Jonathan Anomaly & Walter Veit - 2021 - Monash Bioethics Review 39 (1):60-67.
    In recent years, bioethical discourse around the topic of ‘genetic enhancement’ has become increasingly politicized. We fear there is too much focus on the semantic question of whether we should call particular practices and emerging bio-technologies such as CRISPR ‘eugenics’, rather than the more important question of how we should view them from the perspective of ethics and policy. Here, we address the question of whether ‘eugenics’ can be defended and how proponents and critics of enhancement should engage with (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  17. Three overlooked key functional classes for building up minimal synthetic cells.Antoine Danchin - 2021 - Synthetic Biology 6 (1):ysab010.
    Assembly of minimal genomes revealed many genes encoding unknown functions. Three overlooked functional categories account for some of them. Cells are prone to make errors and age. As a first key function, discrimination between proper and changed entities is indispensable. Discrimination requires management of information, an authentic, yet abstract, cur- rency of reality. For example proteins age, sometimes very fast. The cell must identify, then get rid of old proteins without destroying young ones. Implementing discrimination in cells leads to the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  18. Animal Rights and the Problem of r-Strategists.Kyle Johannsen - 2017 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 20 (2):333-45.
    Wild animal reproduction poses an important moral problem for animal rights theorists. Many wild animals give birth to large numbers of uncared-for offspring, and thus child mortality rates are far higher in nature than they are among human beings. In light of this reproductive strategy – traditionally referred to as the ‘r-strategy’ – does concern for the interests of wild animals require us to intervene in nature? In this paper, I argue that animal rights theorists should embrace fallibility-constrained interventionism: the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  19. The global governance of genetic enhancement technologies: Justification, proposals, and challenges.Jon Rueda - 2024 - Enrahonar: Quaderns de Filosofía 72:55-71.
    The prospect of human genetic enhancement requires an institutional response, and probably the creation of new institutions. The governance of genetic enhancement technologies, moreover, needs to be global in scope. In this article, I analyze the debate on the global governance of human genetic enhancement. I begin by offering a philosophical justification for the need to adopt a global framework for governance of technologies that would facilitate the improvement of non-pathological genetic traits. I then summarize the main concrete proposals that (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  20. Ethical Discourse on Epigenetics and Genome Editing: The Risk of (Epi-) genetic Determinism and Scientifically Controversial Basic Assumptions.Karla Alex & Eva C. Winkler - 2021 - In Michael Welker, Eva Winkler & John Witte Jr (eds.), The Impact of Health Care on Character Formation, Ethical Education, and the Communication of Values in Late Modern Pluralistic Societies. Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt & Wipf & Stock Publishers. pp. 77-99.
    Excerpt: 1. Introduction This chapter provides insight into the diverse ethical debates on genetics and epigenetics. Much controversy surrounds debates about intervening into the germline genome of human embryos, with catchwords such as genome editing, designer baby, and CRISPR/Cas. The idea that it is possible to design a child according to one’s personal preferences is, however, a quite distorted view of what is actually possible with new gene technologies and gene therapies. These are much more limited than the editing (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  21. A critical review of the ethical and legal issues in human germline gene editing: Considering human rights and a call for an African perspective.B. Shozi - 2020 - South African Journal of Bioethics and Law 13 (1):62.
    In the wake of the advent of genome editing technology CRISPR-Cas9 (clustered regularly interspaced palindromic repeat (CRISPR)-associated protein 9), there has been a global debate around the implications of manipulating the human genome. While CRISPR-based germline gene editing is new, the debate about the ethics of gene editing is not – for several decades now, scholars have debated the ethics of making heritable changes to the human genome. The arguments that have been raised both for and against (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  22. Arguments for and against Germline Intervention: A Critical Review of Ronald Green’s Babies by Design.Marvin J. H. Lee & Sophia Lozowski - 2017 - Journal of Healthcare Ethics and Administration 3 (1).
    It seems certain that one day we will allow the genetic technology which will enhance our offspring. A highly effective new tool, called CRISPR, which allows for carving out genes, is already being used to edit the genomes of animals. In July 2017, the FDA legalized that germline drugs for therapeutic purposes could be sold in the market. It is a high time, now, that we need engage in discussions about the ethics of germline intervention. To contribute to the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  23. Habermas and the Question of Bioethics.Hille Haker - 2019 - European Journal for Philosophy of Religion 11 (4):61-86.
    In The Future of Human Nature, Jürgen Habermas raises the question of whether the embryonic genetic diagnosis and genetic modification threatens the foundations of the species ethics that underlies current understandings of morality. While morality, in the normative sense, is based on moral interactions enabling communicative action, justification, and reciprocal respect, the reification involved in the new technologies may preclude individuals to uphold a sense of the undisposability of human life and the inviolability of human beings that is necessary for (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  24. Handservant of Technocracy.Christian Ross - 2022 - Spontaneous Generations 10 (1):63-87.
    The place of scientific expertise in democracy has become increasingly disputed, raising question who ought to have a say in decision-making about science and technology, with what authority, and for what reasons. Public engagement has become a common refrain in technoscientific discussions to address tensions in the rightful roles of experts and the public in democratic decision-making. However, precisely what public engagement entails, who it involves, how it is performed, and to what extent it is desirable for democratic societies remain (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  25. Should Parents Genetically Engineer their Children?Walter Veit - 2019 - Psychology Today.
    Imagine a world where everyone is healthy, intelligent, long living and happy. Intuitively this seems wonderful, albeit unrealistic. However, recent scientific developments in genetic engineering, namely CRISPR/Cas bring the question into public discourse, how the genetic enhancement of humans should be evaluated morally.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  26. Commentary: Setting the Bar Higher.Nicolas Delon - 2019 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 28 (1):40-45.
    Commentary on Neuhaus and Parent, 'Gene doping--In Animals?' (2019).
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  27. ¿Los hominoides o androides destruirán la tierra? — Una revisión de ‘Cómo Crear una Mente’ (How to Create a Mind) por Ray Kurzweil (2012) (revisión revisada 2019).Michael Richard Starks - 2019 - In Delirios Utópicos Suicidas en el Siglo 21 La filosofía, la naturaleza humana y el colapso de la civilización Artículos y reseñas 2006-2019 4TH Edición. Reality Press. pp. 250-262.
    Hace algunos años, Llegué al punto en el que normalmente puedo decir del título de un libro, o al menos de los títulos de los capítulos, qué tipos de errores filosóficos se harán y con qué frecuencia. En el caso de trabajos nominalmente científicos, estos pueden estar en gran parte restringidos a ciertos capítulos que enceran filosóficos o tratan de sacar conclusiones generales sobre el significado o significado a largo plazo de la obra. Normalmente, sin embargo, las cuestiones científicas de (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  28. Artificial Multipandemic as the Most Plausible and Dangerous Global Catastrophic Risk Connected with Bioweapons and Synthetic Biology.Alexey Turchin, Brian Patrick Green & David Denkenberger - manuscript
    Pandemics have been suggested as global risks many times, but it has been shown that the probability of human extinction due to one pandemic is small, as it will not be able to affect and kill all people, but likely only half, even in the worst cases. Assuming that the probability of the worst pandemic to kill a person is 0.5, and assuming linear interaction between different pandemics, 30 strong pandemics running simultaneously will kill everyone. Such situations cannot happen naturally, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  29. Will Hominoids or Androids Destroy the Earth? —A Review of How to Create a Mind by Ray Kurzweil (2012).Michael Starks - 2016 - In Suicidal Utopian Delusions in the 21st Century: Philosophy, Human Nature and the Collapse of Civilization-- Articles and Reviews 2006-2017 2nd Edition Feb 2018. Las Vegas, USA: Reality Press. pp. 675.
    Some years ago I reached the point where I can usually tell from the title of a book, or at least from the chapter titles, what kinds of philosophical mistakes will be made and how frequently. In the case of nominally scientific works these may be largely restricted to certain chapters which wax philosophical or try to draw general conclusions about the meaning or long term significance of the work. Normally however the scientific matters of fact are generously interlarded with (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  30. Enhancement technologies and inequality.Walter Veit - 2018 - Proceedings of the IX Conference of the Spanish Society of Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science.
    Recognizing the variety of dystopian science-fiction novels and movies, from Brave New World to Gattaca and more recently Star Trek, on the future of humanity in which eugenic policies are implemented, genetic engineering has been getting a bad reputation for valid but arguably, mostly historical reasons. In this paper, I critically examine the claim from Mehlman & Botkin (1998: ch. 6) that human enhancement will inevitably accentuate existing inequality in a free market and analyze whether prohibition is the optimal public (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  31. Environmental and Biosafety Research Ethics Committees: Guidelines and Principles for Ethics Reviewers in the South African Context.Maricel Van Rooyen - 2021 - Dissertation, Stellenbosch University
    Over the last two decades, there was an upsurge of research and innovation in biotechnology and related fields, leading to exciting new discoveries in areas such as the engineering of biological processes, gene editing, stem cell research, CRISPR-Cas9 technology, Synthetic Biology, recombinant DNA, LMOs and GMOs, to mention only a few. At the same time, these advances generated concerns about biosafety, biosecurity and adverse impacts on biodiversity and the environment, leading to the establishment of Research Ethics Committees (RECs) at (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  32. 인간이나 안드로이드가 지구를 파괴 할 것인가? — '마음 만드는 법'의 검토 (How to Create a Mind) Ray Kurzweil (2010).Michael Richard Starks - 2020 - In 지구상의 지옥에 오신 것을 환영합니다 : 아기, 기후 변화, 비트 코인, 카르텔, 중국, 민주주의, 다양성, 역학, 평등, 해커, 인권, 이슬람, 자유주의, 번영, 웹, 혼돈, 기아, 질병, 폭력, 인공 지능, 전쟁. Las Vegas, NV USA: Reality Press. pp. 172-186.
    몇 년전, 저는 보통 책의 제목이나 적어도 장 제목에서 어떤 종류의 철학적 실수를 저지르고 얼마나 자주 알 수 있는지 를 알 수 있는 지점에 도달했습니다. 명목상 과학적 작품의 경우, 이들은 크게 철학적 왁스 또는 의미 또는 긴에 대한 일반적인 결론을 그리려는 특정 장으로 제한 될 수있다-작업의기간 의의. 그러나 일반적으로 사실의 과학적 문제는 이러한 사실이 무엇을 의미하는지에 관해서는 철학적 횡설수설과 관대하게 얽혀있다. Wittgenstein이 약 80 년 전에 과학 문제와 다양한 언어 게임에 의한 설명 사이에 설명 한 명확한 차이점은 거의 고려되지 않으므로 (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  33. Genetically Modifying Livestock for Improved Welfare: A Path Forward.Adam Shriver & Emilie McConnachie - 2018 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 31 (2):161-180.
    In recent years, humans’ ability to selectively modify genes has increased dramatically as a result of the development of new, more efficient, and easier genetic modification technology. In this paper, we argue in favor of using this technology to improve the welfare of agricultural animals. We first argue that using animals genetically modified for improved welfare is preferable to the current status quo. Nevertheless, the strongest argument against pursuing gene editing for welfare is that there are alternative approaches to addressing (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  34. Non-Self from the perspective of the Gene.Sun Kyeong Yu - 2020 - In Buddhism and Culture (Buddhist magazine in Korea). Seoul, South Korea:
    “Non-Self from the perspective of the Gene” September 2021, Buddhism and Culture (a Korean-language Buddhist magazine sponsored by the Foundation for the Promotion of Korean Buddhism), Korea.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  35. Rezension von "Sind wir fest verdrahtet? " (Are We Hardwired?) von Clark & Grunstein (2000) (Überprüfung überarbeitet 2019).Michael Richard Starks - 2020 - In Willkommen in der Hölle auf Erden: Babys, Klimawandel, Bitcoin, Kartelle, China, Demokratie, Vielfalt, Dysgenie, Gleichheit, Hacker, Menschenrechte, Islam, Liberalismus, Wohlstand, Internet, Chaos, Hunger, Krankheit, Gewalt, Künstliche Intelligenz, Krieg. Reality Press. pp. 91-94.
    Dies ist eine ausgezeichnete Überprüfung der Gen-/Umgebungsinteraktionen auf das Verhalten und ist, obwohl sie etwas veraltet ist, eine einfache und lohnende Lektüre. Sie beginnen mit Zwillingsstudien, die den überwältigenden Einfluss der Genetik auf das Verhalten zeigen. Sie stellen die immer bekannter werdenden Studien von Judith Harris fest, die die Fakten erweitern und zusammenfassen, dass die gemeinsame häusliche Umgebung fast keinen Einfluss auf das Verhalten hat und dass adoptierte Kinder so anders wachsen als ihre Stiefbrüder und -schwestern wie zufällig ausgewählte Menschen. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark