• 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

对可遗传基因组编辑辩论中“身份”不同概念的分析。

An analysis of different concepts of "identity" in the heritable genome editing debate.

机构信息

Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, England.

出版信息

Med Health Care Philos. 2024 Mar;27(1):121-131. doi: 10.1007/s11019-023-10189-1. Epub 2024 Jan 8.

DOI:10.1007/s11019-023-10189-1
PMID:38189908
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10904499/
Abstract

Human heritable genome editing (HHGE) involves editing the genes of human gametes and/or early human embryos. Whilst 'identity' is a key concept underpinning the current HHGE debate, there is a lack of inclusive analysis on different concepts of 'identity' which renders the overall debate confusing at times. This paper first contributes to reviewing the existing literature by consolidating how 'identity' has been discussed in the HHGE debate. Essentially, the discussion will reveal an ontological and empirical understanding of identity when different types of identity are involved. Here, I discuss genetic, numerical, qualitative and narrative and how each of them is relevant in the HHGE context. Secondly, given the different types of identity, the paper explores how we could navigate these different interpretations of identity in a way that promotes an inclusive and informed discussion between primary stakeholders and the general public in the HHGE debate. Here, I argue for and refine a multi-faceted concept of identity as a suitable framework for discussing the ethical and societal implications of HHGE because it not only could integrate different understandings of identity but also highlight the interconnectedness between these different understandings.

摘要

人类可遗传基因组编辑(HHGE)涉及编辑人类配子和/或早期人类胚胎的基因。虽然“身份”是当前 HHGE 辩论的一个关键概念,但缺乏对不同“身份”概念的包容性分析,这使得整体辩论有时令人困惑。本文首先通过整合 HHGE 辩论中讨论的“身份”方式来为审查现有文献做出贡献。从本质上讲,当涉及不同类型的身份时,讨论将揭示对身份的本体论和经验理解。在这里,我讨论了遗传、数字、质量和叙述,以及它们在 HHGE 背景下的相关性。其次,鉴于不同类型的身份,本文探讨了我们如何以一种促进主要利益相关者和普通公众在 HHGE 辩论中进行包容和知情讨论的方式来驾驭这些不同的身份解释。在这里,我主张并完善了一个多方面的身份概念,作为讨论 HHGE 的伦理和社会影响的合适框架,因为它不仅可以整合对身份的不同理解,还可以突出这些不同理解之间的相互联系。

相似文献

1
An analysis of different concepts of "identity" in the heritable genome editing debate.对可遗传基因组编辑辩论中“身份”不同概念的分析。
Med Health Care Philos. 2024 Mar;27(1):121-131. doi: 10.1007/s11019-023-10189-1. Epub 2024 Jan 8.
2
Short-Term Memory Impairment短期记忆障碍
3
The Black Book of Psychotropic Dosing and Monitoring.《精神药物剂量与监测黑皮书》
Psychopharmacol Bull. 2024 Jul 8;54(3):8-59.
4
"In a State of Flow": A Qualitative Examination of Autistic Adults' Phenomenological Experiences of Task Immersion.“心流状态”:对自闭症成年人任务沉浸现象学体验的质性研究
Autism Adulthood. 2024 Sep 16;6(3):362-373. doi: 10.1089/aut.2023.0032. eCollection 2024 Sep.
5
A Spectrum of Understanding: A Qualitative Exploration of Autistic Adults' Understandings and Perceptions of Friendship(s).理解的光谱:对自闭症成年人对友谊的理解与认知的质性探索
Autism Adulthood. 2024 Dec 2;6(4):438-450. doi: 10.1089/aut.2023.0051. eCollection 2024 Dec.
6
Eliciting adverse effects data from participants in clinical trials.从临床试验参与者中获取不良反应数据。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Jan 16;1(1):MR000039. doi: 10.1002/14651858.MR000039.pub2.
7
[Volume and health outcomes: evidence from systematic reviews and from evaluation of Italian hospital data].[容量与健康结果:来自系统评价和意大利医院数据评估的证据]
Epidemiol Prev. 2013 Mar-Jun;37(2-3 Suppl 2):1-100.
8
The quantity, quality and findings of network meta-analyses evaluating the effectiveness of GLP-1 RAs for weight loss: a scoping review.评估胰高血糖素样肽-1受体激动剂(GLP-1 RAs)减肥效果的网状Meta分析的数量、质量及结果:一项范围综述
Health Technol Assess. 2025 Jun 25:1-73. doi: 10.3310/SKHT8119.
9
Factors that impact on the use of mechanical ventilation weaning protocols in critically ill adults and children: a qualitative evidence-synthesis.影响重症成人和儿童机械通气撤机方案使用的因素:一项定性证据综合分析
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Oct 4;10(10):CD011812. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011812.pub2.
10
"You Are the Expert of Your Own Experience": A Thematic Analysis of Experiences of Autism and Gender Diversity in Adulthood.“你是自身经历的专家”:成年期自闭症与性别多样性经历的主题分析
Autism Adulthood. 2024 Sep 16;6(3):300-311. doi: 10.1089/aut.2022.0111. eCollection 2024 Sep.

本文引用的文献

1
Public Engagement With Brain Organoid Research and Application: Lessons From Genome Editing.公众对脑类器官研究与应用的参与:来自基因编辑的经验教训。
AJOB Neurosci. 2022 Apr-Jun;13(2):98-100. doi: 10.1080/21507740.2022.2048733.
2
Rewriting the human genome, rewriting human rights law? Human rights, human dignity, and human germline modification in the CRISPR era.改写人类基因组,改写人权法?人权、人类尊严与CRISPR时代的人类种系修饰
J Law Biosci. 2020 Jun 9;7(1):lsaa006. doi: 10.1093/jlb/lsaa006. eCollection 2020 Jan-Dec.
3
He Jiankui´s gene-editing experiment and the non-identity problem.贺建奎的基因编辑实验与非同一性问题。
Bioethics. 2021 Jul;35(6):563-573. doi: 10.1111/bioe.12878. Epub 2021 May 5.
4
Gene editing and disabled people: a response to Felicity Boardman.基因编辑与残疾人:对费利西蒂·博德曼的回应
J Community Genet. 2020 Jul;11(3):241-243. doi: 10.1007/s12687-020-00460-w. Epub 2020 Mar 27.
5
Systematic scoping review of the concept of 'genetic identity' and its relevance for germline modification.系统范围综述“遗传身份”概念及其与生殖系修饰的相关性。
PLoS One. 2020 Jan 24;15(1):e0228263. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0228263. eCollection 2020.
6
Reproductive CRISPR does not cure disease.生殖性CRISPR无法治愈疾病。
Bioethics. 2019 Nov;33(9):1072-1082. doi: 10.1111/bioe.12663. Epub 2019 Sep 6.
7
Human genome editing and the identity politics of genetic disability.人类基因组编辑与遗传残疾的身份政治
J Community Genet. 2020 Apr;11(2):125-127. doi: 10.1007/s12687-019-00437-4. Epub 2019 Sep 6.
8
Is the non-identity problem relevant to public health and policy? An online survey.非同一性问题与公共卫生和政策相关吗?一项在线调查。
BMC Med Ethics. 2019 Jul 5;20(1):46. doi: 10.1186/s12910-019-0379-5.
9
Let Us Assume That Gene Editing is Safe-The Role of Safety Arguments in the Gene Editing Debate.
Camb Q Healthc Ethics. 2019 Jan;28(1):100-111. doi: 10.1017/S0963180118000439.
10
Human dignity and gene editing: Using human dignity as an argument against modifying the human genome and germline is a logical fallacy.人类尊严与基因编辑:将人类尊严作为反对修改人类基因组和生殖系的论据是一种逻辑谬误。
EMBO Rep. 2018 Oct;19(10). doi: 10.15252/embr.201846789. Epub 2018 Sep 20.