Crispr-Cas 9 时代的多样性、公平性和包容性(Dei)商数:推测性论证谱系

S. Mainaly
{"title":"Crispr-Cas 9 时代的多样性、公平性和包容性(Dei)商数:推测性论证谱系","authors":"S. Mainaly","doi":"10.56734/ijahss.v5n4a4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The advent of CRISPR-Cas9 gene-editing technology has sparked a complex discourse on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). While it could potentially eradicate genetic disorders affecting marginalized groups, concerns arise regarding ethical implications, eugenics, exacerbating biases, and socioeconomic divides. One salient aspect of this discourse pertains to the ethical considerations surrounding using CRISPR-Cas9 for germline editing, which could theoretically eradicate genetic disorders disproportionately affecting specific populations. Proponents argue it could foster inclusivity through personalized therapies for underrepresented populations, though met with skepticism. This revolutionary tool necessitates critically examining its ethical, socioeconomic, and governance ramifications.","PeriodicalId":339909,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Arts, Humanities & Social Science","volume":"99 S4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Diversity, Equity, And Inclusion (Dei) Quotient in The Age of Crispr-Cas 9: A Speculative Spectrum of Argumentation\",\"authors\":\"S. Mainaly\",\"doi\":\"10.56734/ijahss.v5n4a4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The advent of CRISPR-Cas9 gene-editing technology has sparked a complex discourse on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). While it could potentially eradicate genetic disorders affecting marginalized groups, concerns arise regarding ethical implications, eugenics, exacerbating biases, and socioeconomic divides. One salient aspect of this discourse pertains to the ethical considerations surrounding using CRISPR-Cas9 for germline editing, which could theoretically eradicate genetic disorders disproportionately affecting specific populations. Proponents argue it could foster inclusivity through personalized therapies for underrepresented populations, though met with skepticism. This revolutionary tool necessitates critically examining its ethical, socioeconomic, and governance ramifications.\",\"PeriodicalId\":339909,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Arts, Humanities & Social Science\",\"volume\":\"99 S4\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Arts, Humanities & Social Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.56734/ijahss.v5n4a4\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Arts, Humanities & Social Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.56734/ijahss.v5n4a4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

CRISPR-Cas9 基因编辑技术的出现引发了关于多样性、公平性和包容性(DEI)的复杂讨论。虽然该技术有可能根除影响边缘群体的遗传疾病,但也引发了对伦理影响、优生学、加剧偏见和社会经济鸿沟的担忧。这种讨论的一个突出方面涉及使用 CRISPR-Cas9 进行种系编辑的伦理考虑,理论上它可以根除对特定人群影响过大的遗传疾病。支持者认为,它可以通过为代表性不足的人群提供个性化疗法来促进包容性,但也有人对此持怀疑态度。对于这一革命性的工具,有必要对其伦理、社会经济和管理影响进行批判性研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Diversity, Equity, And Inclusion (Dei) Quotient in The Age of Crispr-Cas 9: A Speculative Spectrum of Argumentation
The advent of CRISPR-Cas9 gene-editing technology has sparked a complex discourse on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). While it could potentially eradicate genetic disorders affecting marginalized groups, concerns arise regarding ethical implications, eugenics, exacerbating biases, and socioeconomic divides. One salient aspect of this discourse pertains to the ethical considerations surrounding using CRISPR-Cas9 for germline editing, which could theoretically eradicate genetic disorders disproportionately affecting specific populations. Proponents argue it could foster inclusivity through personalized therapies for underrepresented populations, though met with skepticism. This revolutionary tool necessitates critically examining its ethical, socioeconomic, and governance ramifications.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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