Bioethics for technology?

Current Opinion in Biotechnology

Volumn 15, Issue 3, 2004, Pages 250-253

  Hails, Rosie ^a  

^a CENTRE FOR ECOLOGY AND HYDROLOGY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

genetically modified; GM; intellectual property; IP

Indexed keywords

BIOTECHNOLOGY; COMMERCIAL PHENOMENA; ETHICS; HUMAN; LAW; MARKET; MOLECULAR CLONING; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; SOCIOECONOMICS;

BIOMEDICAL AND BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH; GENETICS AND REPRODUCTION;

BIOETHICS; BIOTECHNOLOGY; CLONING, ORGANISM; HUMANS; PUBLIC POLICY; SOCIAL CLASS;

EID: 2942606071     PISSN: 09581669     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.copbio.2004.03.009     Document Type: Review

References (31)

1. Polkinghorne J.C. Ethical issues in biotechnology. Trends Biotechnol. 18:2000;8-10
2. The Human Genetics Commission Website. URL: http://www.hgc.gov.uk
3. Agriculture and Environment Biotechnology Commission. URL: http://www.aebc.gov.uk
4. Prince Charles HRH: Respect for the Earth. Lecture 6 BBC Reith Lectures 2000, URL: http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/events/reith_2000/lecture6. stm
5. Davies K.G. What makes genetically modified organisms so distasteful? Trends Biotechnol. 19:2001;424-427 This paper expounds the idea that the holistic idealism derived from Aristotle may explain why some find the movement of genes between species an objectionable idea. This contrasts with the population thinking of Charles Darwin, on which so much of current biological research is based.
6. Hwang W.S., Ryu Y.J., Park J.H., Park E.S., Lee E.G., Koo J.M., Chun H.Y., Lee B.C., Kang S.K., Kim S.J., et al. Evidence of a pluripotent human embryonic stem cell line derived from a cloned blastocyst. Science. 303:2004;1669-1674 This paper reports the derivation of the first pluripotent embryonic stem cell line. A related article by Pearson [7] comments on the significance of this in terms of the public debate on stem-cell research, particularly in the US.
7. Pearson H. Cloning success marks Asian nations as scientific tigers. Nature. 427:2004;664
8. The Human Reproductive Cloning Act 2001. URL: www.hmso.gov.uk/acts
9. The Royal Society: Stem cell research and therapeutic cloning: an update. 2000, statement 12/00; URL: http://www.royalsoc.ac.uk
10. The Royal Society: Human reproductive cloning: a statement by the Royal Society. URL: www.royalsoc.ac.uk 2002, Policy document 1/03
11. Nuffield Council on Bioethics: Stem cell therapy: the ethical issues. URL: www.nuffieldfoundation.org/bioethics 2000
12. Department of Health: Stem cell research: medical progress with Responsibility. A report from the Chief Medical Officer's Expert Group. 2000; URL: www.dh.gov.uk
13. The Royal Society: Stem cell research - second update. 2001, Policy document 9/01; URL: http://www.royalsoc.ac.uk
14. Report by the House of Lords Select Committee on Stem Cell Research. 2002; URL: http://www.parliament.the-stationary-office.co.uk/
15. Doll J.J. The patenting of DNA. Science. 280:1998;689-690
16. Science Magazine Online. URL: http://www.sciencemag.org/feature/data/ 980465.shl
17. Cayford J. GMO opposition not based on a mistake. Nat Biotechnol. 21:2003;493
18. Editorial: Patenting pieces of people. Nat Biotechnol 2003, 21:341.
19. Nuffield Council on Bioethics: Genetically modified crops: the ethical and social issues. 1999; URL: www.nuffieldfoundation.org/bioethics
20. Potrykus I. Golden rice and beyond. Plant Physiol. 125:2001;1157-1161 A very interesting first hand account of the development of 'Golden Rice', including the challenges of intellectual property rights and GM opposition.
21. Heller M.A., Eisenberg R.S. Can patents deter innovation? The anticommons in biomedical research. Science. 280:1998;698-701
22. Graff G.D., Cullen S.E., Bradford K.J., Zilberman D., Bennett A.B. The public-private structure of intellectual property ownership in agricultural biotechnology. Nat Biotechnol. 21:2003;989-995
23. Nuffield Council on Bioethics: The use of genetically modified crops in developing countries: a follow up discussion paper. 2003; URL: http://www.nuffieldfoundation.org/bioethics This review includes the socio-economic context, considered answers to a range of questions that have been posed in this area, and discussion of ownership issues in GM technologies.
24. Hodgson J. Positive labeling? Nat Biotechnol. 20:2002;757
25. Mitchell P. Europe angers US with strict GM labeling. Nat Biotechnol. 21:2003;6
26. US to challenge EU's policy on GM foods in WTO. In Agence France Presse May 9, 2003.
27. Editorial: Caution: may be harmless if swallowed. Nat Biotechnol 2002, 20:753.
28. Reiss M. Labeling GM foods - the ethical way forward. Nat Biotechnol. 20:2002;868
29. GM crops? Coexistence and liability. Report by the Agriculture and Environment Biotechnology Commission, November 2003. URL: http://www.aebc.gov.uk
30. Caplan A. Is biomedical research too dangerous to pursue? Science. 303:2004;1142 This article discusses the current tension between those who follow utilitarian ethics and those who are concerned about deeper issues, such as the loss of our humanity. This is discussed largely in the context of biomedical research in the US.
31. Davies K.G. Creative tension. What links Aristotle, William Blake, Darwin and GM crops? Nature. 407:2000;135