Suppr超能文献

从长凳上看:科学家对人类基因编辑研究的应用和治理的看法。

The View from the Benches: Scientists' Perspectives on the Uses and Governance of Human Gene-Editing Research.

机构信息

Department of Social Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA; Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.

H.W. Odum Institute for Research in Social Science, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA; Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.

出版信息

CRISPR J. 2021 Aug;4(4):609-615. doi: 10.1089/crispr.2021.0038.

Abstract

The advent of human gene editing has stimulated international interest in how best to govern this research. However, research on stakeholder views has neglected scientists themselves. We surveyed 212 scientists who use gene editing in their work. Questions captured views on oversight and use of somatic and germline human gene editing for treatment, prevention, and enhancement. More respondents were supportive of somatic than germline editing, and more supported gene editing for treatment compared to prevention. Few supported its use for enhancement. When presented with specific conditions, levels of support for somatic editing differed by type of condition. Almost all respondents said scientists and national government representatives should be involved in oversight, but only 28% said scientists are best positioned to oversee gene-editing research. These results can inform the development of sound approaches to research governance, demonstrating the importance of identifying specific gene-editing uses when considering oversight.

摘要

人类基因编辑的出现激发了国际社会对于如何对该研究进行最佳管理的兴趣。然而,利益相关者观点的研究却忽视了科学家本身。我们调查了 212 名在工作中使用基因编辑的科学家。问题包括对监管以及体细胞和生殖细胞人类基因编辑用于治疗、预防和增强的看法。更多的受访者支持体细胞编辑而不是生殖细胞编辑,并且更多的人支持基因编辑用于治疗而不是预防。很少有人支持将其用于增强。当提出具体条件时,对体细胞编辑的支持程度因条件类型而异。几乎所有受访者都说科学家和国家政府代表应该参与监管,但只有 28%的人表示科学家最适合监管基因编辑研究。这些结果可以为制定健全的研究治理方法提供信息,表明在考虑监管时确定具体的基因编辑用途的重要性。

相似文献

7
Revising, Correcting, and Transferring Genes.基因的修订、修正和转移。
Am J Bioeth. 2020 Aug;20(8):7-18. doi: 10.1080/15265161.2020.1783024.

引用本文的文献

2
Experts' perspectives on human gene editing in Switzerland.瑞士专家对人类基因编辑的看法。
J Community Genet. 2025 Feb;16(1):83-90. doi: 10.1007/s12687-024-00757-0. Epub 2024 Dec 19.
3
The public-private research ecosystem in the genome editing era.基因组编辑时代的公私合作研究生态系统。
iScience. 2024 May 3;27(6):109896. doi: 10.1016/j.isci.2024.109896. eCollection 2024 Jun 21.
5
The roadmap of bioeconomy in China.中国生物经济路线图。
Eng Biol. 2022 Nov 30;6(4):71-81. doi: 10.1049/enb2.12026. eCollection 2022 Dec.

本文引用的文献

2
Global citizen deliberation on genome editing.全球公民对基因编辑的审议。
Science. 2020 Sep 18;369(6510):1435-1437. doi: 10.1126/science.abb5931.
7
Human Germline Genome Editing: An Assessment.人类生殖系基因组编辑:评估。
CRISPR J. 2019 Oct;2(5):253-265. doi: 10.1089/crispr.2019.0038.
9
Is Enhancement the Price of Prevention in Human Gene Editing?在人类基因编辑中,强化是预防的代价吗?
CRISPR J. 2018 Dec;1(6):351-354. doi: 10.1089/crispr.2018.0040. Epub 2018 Nov 26.
10
Do CRISPR Germline Ethics Statements Cut It?CRISPR生殖系伦理声明可行吗?
CRISPR J. 2018 Apr;1(2):115-125. doi: 10.1089/crispr.2017.0024.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验