Department of Social Medicine and Center for Bioethics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.
Department of Philosophy, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.
CRISPR J. 2024 Aug;7(4):180-187. doi: 10.1089/crispr.2024.0021. Epub 2024 Jul 8.
Traditional distinctions between treatment and enhancement goals for human genome editing (HGE) have animated oversight considerations, yet these categories have been complicated by the addition of prevention as a possible target for HGE applications. To assess the role these three categories might play in continued HGE governance efforts, we report on interviews with genome editing scientists and governance group members. While some accepted traditional distinctions between treatment and enhancement and rejected the latter as unacceptable, others argued that the concept of enhancement is largely irrelevant or not as morally problematic as suggested. Others described how preventive goals for HGE create gray zones where prevention and enhancement may be difficult to distinguish, which may stymie uses of HGE. We conclude by discussing the governance implications of these various understandings of treatment, prevention, and enhancement as HGE research moves beyond the treatment of serious disease to embrace longer range preventive goals.
传统上,人类基因组编辑(HGE)的治疗和增强目标之间存在区别,这引起了监管方面的考虑,但随着将预防作为 HGE 应用的可能目标添加进来,这些类别变得更加复杂。为了评估这三个类别在继续进行 HGE 治理工作中可能发挥的作用,我们报告了对基因组编辑科学家和治理小组成员的访谈。虽然有些人接受了治疗和增强之间的传统区别,并拒绝将后者视为不可接受的,但也有人认为增强的概念在很大程度上无关紧要,或者不像人们所认为的那样存在道德问题。还有人描述了 HGE 的预防目标如何在预防和增强之间难以区分的灰色地带创造了,这可能会阻碍 HGE 的使用。我们最后讨论了在 HGE 研究从严重疾病的治疗扩展到长期预防目标时,这些对治疗、预防和增强的不同理解对治理的影响。