Egalitarian Justice and the Prevalence Principle in Human Genome Editing.

IF 1.9 3区 哲学 Q3 ETHICS
Douglas MacKay, R Jean Cadigan, Eric Juengst, Alexandra Robinson, Rebecca L Walker
{"title":"Egalitarian Justice and the Prevalence Principle in Human Genome Editing.","authors":"Douglas MacKay, R Jean Cadigan, Eric Juengst, Alexandra Robinson, Rebecca L Walker","doi":"10.1093/jmp/jhag008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>National and international agencies and organizations are currently considering which ethical principles should inform the governance and use of heritable and non-heritable human genome editing. In this paper, we consider the prevalence principle, according to which heritable and non-heritable genome editing in humans is permissible if and only if it involves the conversion of variants to ones expected to produce traits that are prevalent in the relevant population. This principle thus permits genome editing targeting variants responsible for disease and disability but prohibits genetic enhancement. We consider whether the prevalence principle is supported by considerations of egalitarian justice, as its proponents claim. We argue that it is not and that prominent theories of egalitarian justice instead offer different approaches to genome editing governance. We identify four egalitarian principles policymakers should consider when crafting anticipatory guidance for heritable and non-heritable genome editing.</p>","PeriodicalId":47377,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medicine and Philosophy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-04-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13130085/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medicine and Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jmp/jhag008","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

National and international agencies and organizations are currently considering which ethical principles should inform the governance and use of heritable and non-heritable human genome editing. In this paper, we consider the prevalence principle, according to which heritable and non-heritable genome editing in humans is permissible if and only if it involves the conversion of variants to ones expected to produce traits that are prevalent in the relevant population. This principle thus permits genome editing targeting variants responsible for disease and disability but prohibits genetic enhancement. We consider whether the prevalence principle is supported by considerations of egalitarian justice, as its proponents claim. We argue that it is not and that prominent theories of egalitarian justice instead offer different approaches to genome editing governance. We identify four egalitarian principles policymakers should consider when crafting anticipatory guidance for heritable and non-heritable genome editing.

平等正义与人类基因组编辑的普遍性原则。
国家和国际机构和组织目前正在考虑哪些伦理原则应该为可遗传和不可遗传的人类基因组编辑的治理和使用提供指导。在本文中,我们考虑了流行原则,根据该原则,当且仅当涉及将变异转化为预期产生相关人群中普遍存在的性状时,人类的遗传和非遗传基因组编辑是允许的。因此,这一原则允许针对导致疾病和残疾的变异进行基因组编辑,但禁止基因增强。我们考虑流行原则是否得到平等正义的支持,正如其支持者所声称的那样。我们认为,事实并非如此,相反,著名的平等正义理论为基因组编辑治理提供了不同的方法。我们确定了决策者在为可遗传和不可遗传的基因组编辑制定预期指导时应该考虑的四个平等主义原则。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
6.20%
发文量
30
期刊介绍: This bimonthly publication explores the shared themes and concerns of philosophy and the medical sciences. Central issues in medical research and practice have important philosophical dimensions, for, in treating disease and promoting health, medicine involves presuppositions about human goals and values. Conversely, the concerns of philosophy often significantly relate to those of medicine, as philosophers seek to understand the nature of medical knowledge and the human condition in the modern world. In addition, recent developments in medical technology and treatment create moral problems that raise important philosophical questions. The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy aims to provide an ongoing forum for the discussion of such themes and issues.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书