Search

The authors argue that in preventing and controlling the pandemic of Covid‐19, we should have taken an offensive or proactive strategy rather than a defensive or reactionary one because the former type of approach can bring about more health benefits and fewer harms than can the latter. The offensive or proactive approach consists of two parts: The first part is to preemptively establish a barrier between a novel virus and humans in order to prevent the spillover of the virus into humans, and the second part is that, when a spillover fails to be prevented, we should take public interventions, such as contact tracing, social distancing, and quarantine and isolation, as early as when there are several dozens or one hundred or more cases that manifest symptoms with an unknown etiology in order to prevent an epidemic that is still limited to relatively small groups from developing into an outbreak.

This paper focuses on the ethical and regulatory issues raised by gene editing. In the introduction of this paper, authors provide the background where the ethical and regulatory issues by gene editing have been raised including the scientific dimension of gene-editing techniques. In the second part of the paper, the authors focus on ethical issues in human gene editing with the start of Huang Junjiu case and He Jiankui case. Here, the authors discuss the criteria for evaluating action, general ethical issues in gene editing, and try to answer two crucial questions: is it ethically justifiable to use human embryo in ex vivo genome editing study and is it ethically justifiable to perform heritable human genome editing? In answering the second question, the authors discuss the arguments against and for heritable human genome editing, methodological problem, and the building of an ethical framework for heritable human genome editing. In the third part of the paper, the authors focus on regulatory issues in gene editing including proactionary approach versus ethically thinking ahead approach, self-regulation versus top-down regulation, transparency versus confidentiality, and education versus punishment.

The shocking announcement of genetically modified babies creates an opportunity to overhaul the nation’s science, argue Ruipeng Lei and colleagues. The shocking announcement of genetically modified babies creates an opportunity to overhaul the nation’s science, argue Ruipeng Lei and colleagues.

This paper provides an ethical analysis of the controversy that arose from the CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing research involving human embryos that was conducted by a research team in Guangzhou, China, in 2015. It is argued that the researchers involved did not overstep ethical boundaries. This was confirmed to be the case in an international meeting of experts that was convened following the controversy. It is further argued that the controversy highlights the tension between two fundamentally different policies on developing genome editing technology – one proactionary and the other precautionary. This paper argues for a third approach, based on the policy of “crossing the river by probing stones”. Such an approach is consistent with current international recommendations to prioritise basic and pre-clinical research, and to allow the application of genome editing technology to somatic human cells. However, the application of the technology in germline genetic modification for human reproduction or enhancement for medical purposes should not be allowed at present. This is because the attending risks are not well understood and could be excessive or extraordinary, with little or no prospect of benefit. In addition, this paper calls for norms and regulations to be developed for genetically modifying non-human living things. Finally, the paper concludes with a letter that was sent by the author (and another) to the New York Times, setting out China’s fundamental stance on genetic modification involving humans and human derivatives.

The goal of the International HapMap Project is to determine the common patterns of DNA sequence variation in the human genome and to make this information freely available in the public domain. An international consortium is developing a map of these patterns across the genome by determining the genotypes of one million or more sequence variants, their frequencies and the degree of association between them, in DNA samples from populations with ancestry from parts of Africa, Asia and Europe. The HapMap will allow the discovery of sequence variants that affect common disease, will facilitate development of diagnostic tools, and will enhance our ability to choose targets for therapeutic intervention. © 2003 Nature Publishing Group.

Inherited genetic variation has a critical but as yet largely uncharacterized role in human disease. Here we report a public database of common variation in the human genome: more than one million single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) for which accurate and complete genotypes have been obtained in 269 DNA samples from four populations, including ten 500-kilobase regions in which essentially all information about common DNA variation has been extracted. These data document the generality of recombination hotspots, a block-like structure of linkage disequilibrium and low haplotype diversity, leading to substantial correlations of SNPs with many of their neighbours. We show how the HapMap resource can guide the design and analysis of genetic association studies, shed light on structural variation and recombination, and identify loci that may have been subject to natural selection during human evolution. © 2005 Nature Publishing Group., link_to_OA_fulltext

When reading the article titled “Ethical Issues in Fecal Microbiota Transplantation in Practice” (1) written by Dr. Ma and her colleagues, I was impressed by their delicate analysis of these issues as well as the potential prospect of the fecal microbiota for transplantation (FMT) as a new approach to treatment. It is rather amazing that the experiences of treating gastro-intestinal diseases with human feces were recorded both in the East and West though there being a time difference, now FMT has being practiced in both places with different cultures.

There are two parts in this article. In the first part the authors describe the regulatory and ethical challenges caused by stem cell research and its clinical application, especially by the widespread use of unproven and unregulated “stem cell therapy” and the guidelines and regulations for attempting to deal with challenges in China. At the end of this part ethical guidelines for human adult (including mesenchymal) stem cell clinical trials and application is appended. In the second part the authors try to provide an overview of regulations or ethical guidelines on human adult/mesenchymal stem cell clinical translation in USA, UK, the European countries and India. The article concludes with the harmonization of regulating human adult/mesenchymal stem cell clinical translation in the world and the Guidelines for the Clinical Translation of Stem Cells drafted by the International Society for Stem Cell Research provide a basis for the harmonization.

The government has launched the healthcare sector reform since the 1980s. From the beginning, the reform has been controversial. What is then the real purpose of the reform? Is it only to reduce the government's burden of health care or establish a just and effective healthcare system? Can healthcare be geared by the market or should the government play a guiding role in it?

La reforme du secteur des soins de sante et son influence sur les hopitaux publics en republique populaire de ChineLe gouvernement a lance la reforme dans le secteur des soins de sante a partir des annees 1980. Des l’origine, cette reforme a ete controversee. Quel en est, au fait, l’objectif reel ? Est-il de reduire le fardeau que le systeme de sante constitue pour le gouvernement ou est-il d’etablir un systeme d’acces aux soins juste et efficace ? Le systeme de sante peut-il etre gouverne par le marche ou le gouvernement doit-il avoir un role d’orientation ?