Gyngell Christopher, Savulescu Julian
Biomedical Ethics Research Group, Murdoch Childrens Research Institute, Parkville, Victoria, Australia
Department of Paediatrics, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
J Med Ethics. 2021 Jun 25;48(10):689-94. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2021-107297.
Lockdowns and quarantines have been implemented widely in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. This has been accompanied by a rise in interest in the ethics of 'passport' systems that allow low-risk individuals greater freedoms during lockdowns and exemptions to quarantines. Immunity and vaccination passports have been suggested to facilitate the greater movement of those with acquired immunity and who have been vaccinated. Another group of individuals who pose a low risk to others during pandemics are those with genetically mediated resistances to pathogens. In this paper, we introduce the concept of genomic passports, which so far have not been explored in the bioethics literature. Using COVID-19 as an illustrative example, we explore the ethical issues raised by genomic passports and highlight differences and similarities to immunity passports. We conclude that, although there remain significant practical and ethical challenges to the implementation of genomic passports, there will be ways to ethically use them in the future.
为应对新冠疫情,各地广泛实施了封锁和隔离措施。与此同时,人们对“通行证”系统的伦理问题兴趣日增,这类系统旨在让低风险个体在封锁期间享有更多自由,并免除隔离。有人提议使用免疫和疫苗接种通行证,以便利获得免疫力者和已接种疫苗者的更大范围流动。在疫情期间,另一类对他人构成低风险的人群是那些对病原体具有基因介导抗性的人。在本文中,我们引入了基因组通行证的概念,迄今为止,生物伦理学文献中尚未对其进行探讨。以新冠疫情为例,我们探讨了基因组通行证引发的伦理问题,并强调了其与免疫通行证的异同。我们得出结论,尽管基因组通行证的实施仍面临重大的实际和伦理挑战,但未来仍有办法在伦理层面加以利用。