• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

我们相信基因:生殖系工程、优生学与人类基因组的未来。

In Genes We Trust: Germline Engineering, Eugenics, and the Future of the Human Genome.

作者信息

Powell Russell

机构信息

Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts, USA

出版信息

J Med Philos. 2015 Dec;40(6):669-95. doi: 10.1093/jmp/jhv025. Epub 2015 Oct 15.

DOI:10.1093/jmp/jhv025
PMID:26475170
Abstract

Liberal proponents of genetic engineering maintain that developing human germline modification technologies is morally desirable because it will result in a net improvement in human health and well-being. Skeptics of germline modification, in contrast, fear evolutionary harms that could flow from intervening in the human germline, and worry that such programs, even if well intentioned, could lead to a recapitulation of the scientifically and morally discredited projects of the old eugenics. Some bioconservatives have appealed as well to the value of retaining our "given" human biological nature as a reason for restraining the development and use of human genetic modification technologies even where they would tend to increase well-being. In this article, I argue that germline intervention will be necessary merely to sustain the levels of genetic health that we presently enjoy for future generations-a goal that should appeal to bioliberals and bioconservatives alike. This is due to the population-genetic consequences of relaxed selection pressures in human populations caused by the increasing efficacy and availability of conventional medicine. This heterodox conclusion, which I present as a problem of intergenerational justice, has been overlooked in medicine and bioethics due to certain misconceptions about human evolution, which I attempt to rectify, as well as the sordid history of Darwinian approaches to medicine and social policy, which I distinguish from the present argument.

摘要

基因工程的自由派支持者认为,开发人类生殖系改造技术在道德上是可取的,因为这将带来人类健康和福祉的净改善。相比之下,生殖系改造的怀疑论者担心干预人类生殖系可能带来的进化危害,并担心此类计划,即使初衷良好,也可能导致旧优生学那些在科学和道德上声名狼藉的项目的重演。一些生物保守主义者也呼吁保留我们“既定”的人类生物本性,以此作为限制人类基因改造技术的开发和使用的理由,即使这些技术往往会增进福祉。在本文中,我认为生殖系干预对于仅仅为了子孙后代维持我们目前所享有的基因健康水平而言将是必要的——这一目标应该会吸引生物自由主义者和生物保守主义者。这是由于传统医学的疗效和可及性不断提高,导致人类群体中选择压力放松所带来的群体遗传学后果。我将这个非正统的结论作为代际正义问题提出,由于对人类进化的某些误解,以及达尔文主义在医学和社会政策方面的丑恶历史(我将其与当前的论点区分开来),这个问题在医学和生物伦理学中一直被忽视。

相似文献

1
In Genes We Trust: Germline Engineering, Eugenics, and the Future of the Human Genome.我们相信基因:生殖系工程、优生学与人类基因组的未来。
J Med Philos. 2015 Dec;40(6):669-95. doi: 10.1093/jmp/jhv025. Epub 2015 Oct 15.
2
Genes, justice, and obligations to future people.基因、正义与对后代的义务。
Soc Philos Policy. 2002 Summer;19(2):360-88. doi: 10.1017/s0265052502192156.
3
Germ-line engineering, freedom, and future generations.生殖系工程、自由与后代。
Bioethics. 2003 Feb;17(1):32-58. doi: 10.1111/1467-8519.00320.
4
An ambiguity in Habermas's argument against liberal eugenics.哈贝马斯反对自由优生学观点中的一个歧义。
Bioethics. 2019 Nov;33(9):1059-1064. doi: 10.1111/bioe.12650. Epub 2019 Aug 28.
5
Imagining human enhancement: whose future, which rationality?想象人类增强:谁的未来,何种理性?
Theor Med Bioeth. 2007;28(6):497-507. doi: 10.1007/s11017-007-9055-8.
6
Negative eugenics and ethical decisions.消极优生学与伦理决策。
J Med Humanit. 1996 Spring;17(1):17-30. doi: 10.1007/BF02276311.
7
Why Human Germline Editing is More Problematic than Selecting Between Embryos: Ethically Considering Intergenerational Relationships.为何人类生殖系编辑比胚胎选择更具问题:从伦理角度考量代际关系
New Bioeth. 2018 Apr;24(1):9-25. doi: 10.1080/20502877.2018.1441669.
8
Designing babies: morally permissible ways to modify the human genome.设计婴儿:修改人类基因组的道德许可方式。
Bioethics. 1995 Jan;9(1):1-15. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8519.1995.tb00297.x.
9
Genetics and the common good.遗传学与共同利益。
Second Opin (Chic). 2001 Oct(8):14-35.
10
Triumph or tragedy? The moral meaning of genetic technology.胜利还是悲剧?基因技术的道德意义。
Am J Jurisprud. 2000;45:1-16. doi: 10.1093/ajj/45.1.1.

引用本文的文献

1
Modular Ontologies for Genetically Modified People and their Bioethical Implications.转基因人类的模块化本体及其生物伦理意义。
Nanoethics. 2024;18(2):9. doi: 10.1007/s11569-024-00459-4. Epub 2024 Aug 19.
2
Adapting Ourselves, Instead of the Environment: An Inquiry into Human Enhancement for Function and Beyond.适应我们自身,而非环境:人类增强的功能与超越。
Integr Psychol Behav Sci. 2024 Jun;58(2):589-637. doi: 10.1007/s12124-023-09797-6. Epub 2023 Aug 19.
3
Risks and benefits of human germline genome editing: An ethical analysis.
人类生殖系基因组编辑的风险与益处:伦理分析
Asian Bioeth Rev. 2018 Jul 16;10(2):133-141. doi: 10.1007/s41649-018-0056-x. eCollection 2018 Jul.
4
Germline gene editing and the precautionary principle.胚系基因编辑与防范原则。
Bioethics. 2020 Jan;34(1):49-59. doi: 10.1111/bioe.12609. Epub 2019 Jun 27.
5
Moral reasons to edit the human genome: picking up from the Nuffield report.从《纳菲尔德报告》看人类基因组编辑的道德理由
J Med Ethics. 2019 Aug;45(8):514-523. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2018-105084. Epub 2019 Jan 24.
6
The ethics of clinical applications of germline genome modification: a systematic review of reasons.生殖系基因组编辑的临床应用伦理:原因的系统评价
Hum Reprod. 2018 Sep 1;33(9):1777-1796. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dey257.