Suppr超能文献

家畜中的基因组编辑、同谋与技术修复异议。

Genome Editing in Livestock, Complicity, and the Technological Fix Objection.

作者信息

Devolder Katrien

机构信息

Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.

出版信息

J Agric Environ Ethics. 2021;34(3):16. doi: 10.1007/s10806-021-09858-z. Epub 2021 May 11.

Abstract

Genome editing in livestock could potentially be used in ways that help resolve some of the most urgent and serious global problems pertaining to livestock, including animal suffering, pollution, antimicrobial resistance, and the spread of infectious disease. But despite this potential, some may object to pursuing it, not because genome editing is wrong in and of itself, but because it is the wrong kind of solution to the problems it addresses: it is merely a 'technological fix' to a complex societal problem. Yet though this objection might have wide intuitive appeal, it is often not clear what, exactly, the moral problem is supposed to be. The aim of this paper is to formulate and shed some light on the 'technological fix objection' to genome editing in livestock. I suggest that three concerns may underlie it, make implicit assumptions underlying the concerns explicit, and cast some doubt on several of these assumptions, at least as they apply to the use of genome editing to produce pigs resistant to the Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome and hornless dairy cattle. I then suggest that the third, and most important, concern could be framed as a concern about complicity in factory farming. I suggest ways to evaluate this concern, and to reduce or offset any complicity in factory farming. Thinking of genome editing's contribution to factory farming in terms of complicity, may, I suggest, tie it more explicitly and strongly to the wider obligations that come with pursuing it, including the cessation of factory farming, thereby addressing the concern that technological fixes focus only on a narrow problem.

摘要

家畜基因组编辑有可能以多种方式帮助解决一些与家畜相关的最紧迫、最严重的全球性问题,包括动物痛苦、污染、抗菌药物耐药性以及传染病传播等问题。尽管有这种潜力,但有些人可能会反对进行家畜基因组编辑,不是因为基因组编辑本身是错误的,而是因为它是解决其所针对问题的错误类型的解决方案:它仅仅是对一个复杂社会问题的“技术修补”。然而,尽管这种反对意见可能具有广泛的直观吸引力,但通常并不清楚到底道德问题是什么。本文的目的是阐述并阐明对家畜基因组编辑的“技术修补反对意见”。我认为可能有三个担忧构成了这一反对意见,明确这些担忧背后隐含的假设,并对其中一些假设提出质疑,至少就它们适用于利用基因组编辑培育抗猪繁殖与呼吸综合征的猪和无角奶牛的情况而言。然后我认为,第三个也是最重要的担忧可以被表述为对参与工厂化养殖的担忧。我提出了评估这一担忧以及减少或抵消在工厂化养殖中任何参与行为的方法。我认为,从同谋的角度看待基因组编辑对工厂化养殖的贡献,可能会更明确、更有力地将其与追求基因组编辑所带来的更广泛义务联系起来,包括停止工厂化养殖,从而解决技术修补只关注狭隘问题的担忧。

相似文献

3
Current progress of genome editing in livestock.家畜基因组编辑的研究进展。
Theriogenology. 2020 Jul 1;150:229-235. doi: 10.1016/j.theriogenology.2020.01.036. Epub 2020 Jan 22.
4
Global developments of genome editing in agriculture.农业领域基因组编辑的全球发展。
Transgenic Res. 2019 Aug;28(Suppl 2):45-52. doi: 10.1007/s11248-019-00133-6.
6
Advances and Perspectives in the Application of CRISPR-Cas9 in Livestock.CRISPR-Cas9 在畜牧业中的应用进展与展望。
Mol Biotechnol. 2021 Sep;63(9):757-767. doi: 10.1007/s12033-021-00347-2. Epub 2021 May 26.
7
CRISPR is knocking on barn door.CRISPR正在敲响谷仓之门。
Reprod Domest Anim. 2017 Oct;52 Suppl 4:39-47. doi: 10.1111/rda.13047.
10
Conscientious Objection and "Effective Referral".良心拒斥与“有效转诊”。
Camb Q Healthc Ethics. 2017 Jan;26(1):32-43. doi: 10.1017/S0963180116000633.

本文引用的文献

2
Genome editing for disease resistance in pigs and chickens.猪和鸡抗病性的基因组编辑
Anim Front. 2019 Jun 25;9(3):6-12. doi: 10.1093/af/vfz013. eCollection 2019 Jul.

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