We found a match
Your institution may have access to this item. Find your institution then sign in to continue.
- Title
Toward Public Bioethics?
- Authors
Kaebnick, Gregory E.
- Abstract
This issue of the Hastings Center Report (May-June 2017) features a couple of interesting takes on the governance challenges of emerging technologies. In an essay on the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine report published this February on human germ-line gene editing, Eric Juengst, a philosopher at the University of North Carolina, argues that the NASEM committee did not manage to rethink the rules. Juengst reaches what he calls an 'eccentric conclusion': 'The committee's 2017 consensus report has been widely interpreted as 'opening the door' to inheritable human genetic modification and holding a line against enhancement interventions. But on a close reading it does neither.' In the column Policy and Politics, Sarah Chan, a chancellor's fellow at the University of Edinburgh, discusses the emerging science of 'organoids,' 'embryoids,' and 'synthetic human entities with embryo-like features' and calls for a sustained effort to rethink the rules for embryo research.
- Subjects
BIOETHICS; CONSENSUS (Social sciences); EMBRYOLOGY; MEDICAL technology; PUBLIC opinion; RESEARCH ethics; SERIAL publications
- Publication
Hastings Center Report, 2017, Vol 47, Issue 3, p2
- ISSN
0093-0334
- Publication type
Editorial
- DOI
10.1002/hast.696