基于对象和基于过程的基因组编辑调控。

IF 0.6 Q2 LAW
Michal Koščík, Eliška Vladíková
{"title":"基于对象和基于过程的基因组编辑调控。","authors":"Michal Koščík,&nbsp;Eliška Vladíková","doi":"10.1163/15718093-bja10078","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The article explores whether the broader regulatory framework applicable to the member states of the EU contains suitable tools to react to the rapid advances in science, especially as to the question of germline editing technologies. From the perspective of EU member states, the regulatory framework is fragmented between norms of international law, secondary EU law and national legislation. The rules and their interpretation are strongly influenced by the concept of precaution, which reflects the concern that there is not enough knowledge to assess the impact of genome editing technology on individuals, society and future populations. However, the argument of precaution loses its strength with every new scientific discovery. The expanding knowledge in the field creates the need to replace regulation, which is based on the lack of knowledge (such as precautionary moratoriums) by the regulation that is based on the actual knowledge. The article reaches a conclusion that the EU framework for advanced treatments and medicinal products is in a state where it can, in principle, address the questions associated with the safety and efficacy of germline editing technologies. The EU framework is, however, not suitable to assess the moral and societal impacts of new technology, which should be left for member states.</p>","PeriodicalId":43934,"journal":{"name":"EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HEALTH LAW","volume":"29 3-5","pages":"484-503"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Object-Based and Process-Based Regulation of Genome Editing.\",\"authors\":\"Michal Koščík,&nbsp;Eliška Vladíková\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/15718093-bja10078\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The article explores whether the broader regulatory framework applicable to the member states of the EU contains suitable tools to react to the rapid advances in science, especially as to the question of germline editing technologies. From the perspective of EU member states, the regulatory framework is fragmented between norms of international law, secondary EU law and national legislation. The rules and their interpretation are strongly influenced by the concept of precaution, which reflects the concern that there is not enough knowledge to assess the impact of genome editing technology on individuals, society and future populations. However, the argument of precaution loses its strength with every new scientific discovery. The expanding knowledge in the field creates the need to replace regulation, which is based on the lack of knowledge (such as precautionary moratoriums) by the regulation that is based on the actual knowledge. The article reaches a conclusion that the EU framework for advanced treatments and medicinal products is in a state where it can, in principle, address the questions associated with the safety and efficacy of germline editing technologies. The EU framework is, however, not suitable to assess the moral and societal impacts of new technology, which should be left for member states.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":43934,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HEALTH LAW\",\"volume\":\"29 3-5\",\"pages\":\"484-503\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HEALTH LAW\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/15718093-bja10078\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HEALTH LAW","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15718093-bja10078","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这篇文章探讨了适用于欧盟成员国的更广泛的监管框架是否包含适当的工具来应对科学的快速进步,特别是在生殖细胞编辑技术的问题上。从欧盟成员国的角度来看,监管框架在国际法规范、次级欧盟法和国家立法之间是支离破碎的。这些规则及其解释受到预防概念的强烈影响,这反映了人们的担忧,即没有足够的知识来评估基因组编辑技术对个人、社会和未来人口的影响。然而,预防的论点随着每一个新的科学发现而失去了它的力量。随着该领域知识的不断扩大,需要用基于实际知识的监管来取代基于缺乏知识(如预防性暂停)的监管。这篇文章得出的结论是,欧盟的先进治疗和医药产品框架原则上可以解决与生殖细胞编辑技术的安全性和有效性相关的问题。然而,欧盟的框架并不适合评估新技术的道德和社会影响,这应该留给成员国。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Object-Based and Process-Based Regulation of Genome Editing.

The article explores whether the broader regulatory framework applicable to the member states of the EU contains suitable tools to react to the rapid advances in science, especially as to the question of germline editing technologies. From the perspective of EU member states, the regulatory framework is fragmented between norms of international law, secondary EU law and national legislation. The rules and their interpretation are strongly influenced by the concept of precaution, which reflects the concern that there is not enough knowledge to assess the impact of genome editing technology on individuals, society and future populations. However, the argument of precaution loses its strength with every new scientific discovery. The expanding knowledge in the field creates the need to replace regulation, which is based on the lack of knowledge (such as precautionary moratoriums) by the regulation that is based on the actual knowledge. The article reaches a conclusion that the EU framework for advanced treatments and medicinal products is in a state where it can, in principle, address the questions associated with the safety and efficacy of germline editing technologies. The EU framework is, however, not suitable to assess the moral and societal impacts of new technology, which should be left for member states.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
52
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Jewish Studies (EJJS) is the Journal of the European Association for Jewish Studies (EAJS). Its main purpose is to publish high-quality research articles, essays and shorter contributions on all aspects of Jewish Studies. Submissions are all double blind peer-reviewed. Additionally, EJJS seeks to inform its readers on current developments in Jewish Studies: it carries comprehensive review-essays on specific topics, trends and debated questions, as well as regular book-reviews. A further section carries reports on conferences, symposia, and descriptions of research projects in every area of Jewish Studies.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信