Search results for 'Genetic intervention' (try it on Scholar)

1000+ found
Sort by:
  1. Erik Malmqvist (2006). The Notion of Health and the Morality of Genetic Intervention. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 9 (2):181-192.score: 240.0
    In the present paper it is argued that genetic interventions on human embryos are in principle permissible if they promote the health of the persons that these embryos will one day become and impermissible if they compromise their health. This so called health-intervention principle is reached by, inter alia, rejecting alternative approaches to the problem of the permissibility of genetic intervention. The health-intervention principle can be interpreted in different ways depending on how the notion of (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Allen E. Buchanan (1995). Equal Opportunity and Genetic Intervention. Social Philosophy and Policy 12 (2):105 - 35.score: 162.0
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. David Benatar (2007). Jonathan Glover, Choosing Children: The Ethical Dilemmas of Genetic Intervention. [REVIEW] Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 10 (2):227-228.score: 150.0
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Rebecca Roache (2008). Choosing Children: The Ethical Dilemmas of Genetic Intervention - by Jonathan Glover. Philosophical Books 49 (1):76-78.score: 150.0
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Allen Buchanan (1996). Choosing Who Will Be Disabled: Genetic Intervention and the Morality of Inclusion. Social Philosophy and Policy 13 (02):18-.score: 150.0
  6. Noam J. Zohar (1991). Prospects for "Genetic Therapy" - Can a Person Benefit From Being Altered?. Prenatal Genetic Intervention: A Dubious Duty? Bioethics 5 (4):275–288.score: 150.0
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. J. Oakley (2008). Review: Jonathan Glover: Choosing Children: The Ethical Dilemmas of Genetic Intervention. [REVIEW] Mind 117 (465):180-183.score: 150.0
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. S. James (1997). Book Review: Genetic Intervention on Human Subjects. [REVIEW] Nursing Ethics 4 (5):435-435.score: 150.0
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. B. Waters (2002). Genetic Turning Points: The Ethics of Human Genetic Intervention, by James C. Peterson. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 2001. 364 Pp. Pb. 15.99. ISBN 0-8028-4920-. [REVIEW] Studies in Christian Ethics 15 (2):99-102.score: 150.0
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Peter J. Smith & Mary Briody Mahowald (2007). Choosing Children: The Ethical Dilemmas of Genetic Intervention (Review). Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 50 (3):471-474.score: 150.0
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Colin Farrelly (2002). Genetic Intervention and the New Frontiers of Justice. Dialogue 41 (01):139-.score: 150.0
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. E. Schroten (1998). Genetic Intervention on Human Subjects: Report of a Working Party of the Catholic Bishops' Joint Committee on Bioethical Issues. London: Linacre Centre, 1996. 80 Pp. Pb. 6.75. ISBN 0-9520-923-1-X. [REVIEW] Studies in Christian Ethics 11 (2):157-158.score: 150.0
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. William Kitchin (2006). The Fundamental Right of Medical Necessity and Genetic Intervention for Substance Abuse. Journal of Evolution and Technology 15 (1):1.score: 150.0
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. R. Clayton (1997). Genetic Intervention in Human Subjects. Journal of Medical Ethics 23 (6):385-386.score: 150.0
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. E. R. Hepburn (1996). Genetic Testing and Early Diagnosis and Intervention: Boon or Burden? Journal of Medical Ethics 22 (2):105-110.score: 144.0
    The possibility of early diagnosis and intervention is radically changed by the advent of genetic testing. The recent report of the Nuffield Council on Bioethics is timely and helpful. I have suggested, that not only the severity of the disability indicated by genetic information, and the accuracy of the data, ought to govern the approach to the implementation of screening for genetic disorders. In addition, assessment of the value of the information to those involved should be (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. Maureen O'Malley & Karola Stotz (2011). Intervention, Integration and Translation in Obesity Research: Genetic, Developmental and Metaorganismal Approaches. Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine 6 (1):2-.score: 132.0
    Obesity is the focus of multiple lines of inquiry that have -- together and separately -- produced many deep insights into the physiology of weight gain and maintenance. We examine three such streams of research and show how they are oriented to obesity intervention through multilevel integrated approaches. The first research programme is concerned with the genetics and biochemistry of fat production, and it links metabolism, physiology, endocrinology and neurochemistry. The second account of obesity is developmental and draws together (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. Timothy F. Murphy (2014). In Defense of Prenatal Genetic Interventions. Bioethics 28 (7):335-342.score: 96.0
    Jürgen Habermas has argued against prenatal genetic interventions used to influence traits on the grounds that only biogenetic contingency in the conception of children preserves the conditions that make the presumption of moral equality possible. This argument fails for a number of reasons. The contingency that Habermas points to as the condition of moral equality is an artifact of evolutionary contingency and not inviolable in itself. Moreover, as a precedent for genetic interventions, parents and society already affect children's (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  18. Robert A. Paoletti (1974). Selected Readings: Genetic Engineering and Bioethics. New York,Mss Information Corp..score: 90.0
    Social Values and Research in Human Embryology ROBERT G. EDWARDS and DAVID J. SHARP E 125 Babies by Means of In Vitro Fertilization: Unethical Experiments ...
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  19. Oliver Feeney (2006). Equality of Whom? A Genetic Perspective on Equality (of Opportunity). Res Publica 12 (4):357-383.score: 88.0
    Rawls’ principle of fair equality of opportunity has been regularly discussed and criticized for being inadequate regarding natural inequalities. In so far as this egalitarian goal is sound, the purpose of the paper is to see how the prospect of radical genetic intervention might affect this particular inadequacy. I propose that, in a post-genetic setting, an appropriate response would be to extend the same rules regulating societal inequalities to a regulation of comparable genetic inequalities. I defend (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. Chris Gyngell & Thomas Douglas (2014). Stocking the Genetic Supermarket: Reproductive Genetic Technologies and Collective Action Problems. Bioethics 28 (7).score: 66.0
    Reproductive genetic technologies (RGTs) allow parents to decide whether their future children will have or lack certain genetic predispositions. A popular model that has been proposed for regulating access to RGTs is the ‘genetic supermarket’. In the genetic supermarket, parents are free to make decisions about which genes to select for their children with little state interference. One possible consequence of the genetic supermarket is that collective action problems will arise: if rational individuals use the (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  21. Lynn J. Frewer, Chaya Howard & Richard Shepherd (1998). The Influence of Initial Attitudes on Responses to Communication About Genetic Engineering in Food Production. Agriculture and Human Values 15 (1):15-30.score: 66.0
    Source credibility has been thought to bean important determinant of peoples‘ reactions toinformation about technology. There has also been muchdebate about the need to communicate effectively withthe public about genetic engineering, particularlywithin the context of food production. Questionnaireswere used to investigate the impact of sourcecredibility, admission of risk uncertainty, andinitial attitude towards genetic engineering onattitudes of respondents after information provision.120 respondents with positive attitudes towardsgenetic engineering in food production were providedwith persuasive information about the technology,where both source attribution (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  22. Danielius Serapinas (2013). Legislative and Ethical Peculiarities of Human Genetic Data Protection. Jurisprudence 20 (1):165-179.score: 66.0
    Genetics is a biomedical science that investigates heredity, variability, occurrence of genetic diseases and their prevention. Genetic science has many fields of science, which deal with different genetic processes, methods, aspects and fields of application. The genetic research in Europe related to the individual as the main subject of the research is exposed to a wide range of ethical and legal issues. From the developments in genetic science other sciences have evolved, thanks to which the (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  23. Amelia Walter Valsamma Eapen, Rudi Črnčec (2013). Exploring Links Between Genotypes, Phenotypes, and Clinical Predictors of Response to Early Intensive Behavioral Intervention in Autism Spectrum Disorder. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 7.score: 66.0
    Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) is amongst the most familial of psychiatric disorders. Twin and family studies have demonstrated a monozygotic concordance rate of 70–90%, dizygotic concordance of around 10% and more than a 20-fold increase in risk for first-degree relatives. Despite major advances in the genetics of autism, the relationship between different aspects of the behavioural and cognitive phenotype and their underlying genetic liability is still unclear. This is complicated by the heterogeneity of autism, which exists at both (...) and phenotypic levels. Given this heterogeneity, one method to find homogeneous entities and link these with specific genotypes would be to pursue endophenotypes. Evidence from neuroimaging, eye tracking and electrophysiology studies supports the hypothesis that, building on genetic vulnerability, ASD emerges from a developmental cascade in which a deficit in attention to social stimuli leads to impaired interactions with primary caregivers. This results in abnormal development of the neurocircuitry responsible for social cognition, which in turn adversely affects later behavioural and functional domains dependent on these early processes, such as language development. Such a model begets a heterogeneous clinical phenotype, and is also supported by studies demonstrating better clinical outcomes with earlier treatment. Treatment response following intensive early behavioural intervention in ASD is also distinctly variable; however, relatively little is known about specific elements of the clinical phenotype that may predict response to current behavioural treatments. This paper overviews the literature regarding genotypes, phenotypes and predictors of response to behavioural intervention in ASD and presents suggestions for future research to explore linkages between these that would enable better identification of, and increased treatment efficacy for, ASD. (shrink)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  24. Jessica Hammond (2010). Genetic Engineering to Avoid Genetic Neglect: From Chance to Responsibility. Bioethics 24 (4):160-169.score: 60.0
    Currently our assessment of whether someone is a good parent depends on the environmental inputs (or lack of such inputs) they give their children. But new genetic intervention technologies, to which we may soon have access, mean that how good a parent is will depend also on the genetic inputs they give their children. Each new piece of available technology threatens to open up another way that we can neglect our children. Our obligations to our children and (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  25. Russell Powell & Allen Buchanan (2011). Breaking Evolution's Chains: The Prospect of Deliberate Genetic Modification in Humans. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 36 (1):6-27.score: 60.0
    Many philosophers invoke the "wisdom of nature" in arguing for varying degrees of caution in the development and use of genetic enhancement technologies. Because they view natural selection as akin to a master engineer that creates functionally and morally optimal design, these authors tend to regard genetic intervention with suspicion. In Part II, we examine and ultimately reject the evolutionary assumptions that underlie the master engineer analogy (MEA). By highlighting the constraints on ordinary unassisted evolution, we show (...)
    Direct download (10 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  26. Michael Fuchs (2012). Reshaping Human Intelligence: The Debate About Genetic Enhancement of Cognitive Functions. Human Reproduction and Genetic Ethics 16 (2):165-181.score: 60.0
    Given the technical feasibility, not only scientists but also moral philosophers approve of an intervention in the genetic basis of our intellectual dispositions. Among the features not related to illnesses, intelligence seems to be an especially promising candidate for genetic enhancement, for intelligence is valued in every culture. The paper presents some of the arguments for and against genetic enhancement of intelligence. The author analyses what kind of good increased intelligence is: an instrumental good for the (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  27. Christian Munthe, Genetic Treatment and Preselection. Ethical Differences and Similarities.score: 60.0
    Medical genetic interventions can be performed in two ways. First, genetic defects may be repaired (gene therapy). Secondly, a possible future individual (an embryo or a possible combination of gametes) may be preselected because of its favourable genetic make-up (by using genetic diagnostic methods and procedures from reproductive medicine so called Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis). The first kind of intervention means that someone gets medical treatment in the normal sense, however, the second kind does not. (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  28. Ted Peters (1995). "Playing God" and Germline Intervention. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 20 (4):365-386.score: 60.0
    The phrase "playing God" so popular with journalists takes on a serious meaning in the debate over germline genetic intervention. While guarding against the dangers of human pride implied in the phrase "playing God," special attention is given here to the Christian concept of the human being as created in the divine image, the imago dei . Human beings are dubbed "created cocreators." In this light ethical arguments proscribing germline intervention are examined and refuted, leaving the door (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  29. Peter Wenz (2005). Engineering Genetic Injustice. Bioethics 19 (1):1–11.score: 60.0
    In their jointly written book, From Chance to Choice: Genetics and Justice, Allen Buchanan, Dan Brock, Norman Daniels and Daniel Wikler defend ’the development and deployment of genetic intervention technologies?.?.?.’, including genetic enhancements, against charges that they exacerbate injustice. The present paper examines some of their arguments. The first section shows that the authors confuse real societies with just societies. The second shows that without this confusion, their arguments reveal the enormous justice-impairing potential of deploying genetic (...)
    Direct download (13 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  30. C. Farrelly (2009). Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis, Reproductive Freedom, and Deliberative Democracy. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 34 (2):135-154.score: 60.0
    In this paper I argue that the account of deliberative democracy advanced by Amy Gutmann and Dennis Thompson (1996, 2004) is a useful normative theory that can help enhance our deliberations about public policy in morally pluralistic societies. More specifically, I illustrate how the prescriptions of deliberative democracy can be applied to the issue of regulating non-medical uses of pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD), such as gender selection. Deliberative democracy does not aim to win a philosophical debate among rival first-order (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  31. R. Song (2007). Genetic Manipulation and the Body of Christ. Studies in Christian Ethics 20 (3):399-420.score: 60.0
    Efforts to distinguish therapeutic from non-therapeutic genetic interventions in the human body have floundered on the assumption that the body should be understood as a psycho-physical corpus. This article argues by contrast that the body of Christ, that is the church, should be seen as the hermeneutical key to interpreting the body, and therefore that features of the corporate life of the church can provide criteria for distinguishing acceptable from unacceptable forms of genetic intervention. Formation of the (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  32. Larry A. Herzberg (2007). Genetic Enhancement and Parental Obligation. Philosophy in the Contemporary World 14 (2):98-111.score: 56.0
    Among moral philosophers, general disapproval of genetic enhancement has in recent years given way to the view that the permissibility of a eugenic policy depends only on its particular features. Buchanan, Brock, Daniels, and Wikler have extensively defended such a view. However, while these authors go so far as to argue that there are conditions under which parents are not only permitted but also obligated to proeure genetic treatments for their intended child, they stop short of arguing that (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  33. N. Koios (2012). Theological Anthropology and Human Germ-Line Intervention. Christian Bioethics 18 (2):187-200.score: 56.0
    Germ-line genetic interventions, like all medicine, can present opportunities to remove suffering, save and prolong human life, and support the conditions for successful human performance. Like all medicine, these interventions also present risks that reflect fallen humans’ age-old egocentric ambition to secure their health and improve their quality of life by relying exclusively on their own power, wisdom, and technical means. Moreover, man has always been tempted to overstep Divine prohibitions and to disregard his own calling to become deified (...)
    Direct download (11 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  34. James Tabery (2009). From a Genetic Predisposition to an Interactive Predisposition: Rethinking the Ethical Implications of Screening for Gene-Environment Interactions. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 34 (1):27-48.score: 54.0
    In a widely acclaimed study from 2002, researchers found a case of gene-environment interaction for a gene controlling neuroenzymatic activity (low vs. high), exposure to childhood maltreatment, and antisocial personality disorder (ASPD). Cases of gene-environment interaction are generally characterized as evincing a genetic predisposition; for example, individuals with low neuroenzymatic activity are generally characterized as having a genetic predisposition to ASPD. I first argue that the concept of a genetic predisposition fundamentally misconstrues these cases of gene-environment interaction. (...)
    Direct download (10 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  35. Barabara Biesecker (1998). Future Directions in Genetic Counseling: Practical and Ethical Considerations. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 8 (2):145-160.score: 54.0
    : The accelerated discovery of gene mutations that lead to increased risk of disease has led to the rapid development of predictive genetic tests. These tests improve the accuracy of assigning risk, but at a time when intervention or prevention strategies are largely unproved. In coming years, however, data will become increasingly available to guide treatment of genetic diseases. Eventually genetic testing will be performed for common diseases as well as for rare genetic conditions. This (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  36. C. Mand, L. Gillam, M. B. Delatycki & R. E. Duncan (2012). Predictive Genetic Testing in Minors for Late-Onset Conditions: A Chronological and Analytical Review of the Ethical Arguments. Journal of Medical Ethics 38 (9):519-524.score: 54.0
    Predictive genetic testing is now routinely offered to asymptomatic adults at risk for genetic disease. However, testing of minors at risk for adult-onset conditions, where no treatment or preventive intervention exists, has evoked greater controversy and inspired a debate spanning two decades. This review aims to provide a detailed longitudinal analysis and concludes by examining the debate's current status and prospects for the future. Fifty-three relevant theoretical papers published between 1990 and December 2010 were identified, and interpretative (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  37. B. R. Jordan & D. F. C. Tsai (2010). Whole-Genome Association Studies for Multigenic Diseases: Ethical Dilemmas Arising From Commercialization--The Case of Genetic Testing for Autism. Journal of Medical Ethics 36 (7):440-444.score: 54.0
    This paper examines some ethical issues arising from whole-genome association studies for multigenic diseases, focusing on the case of autism. Events occurring following the announcement of a genetic test for autism in France (2005–2009) are described to exemplify the ethical controversies that can arise when genetic testing for autism is applied prematurely and inappropriately promoted by biotech companies. The authors argue that genetic tests assessing one or a few genes involved in highly multigenic disorders can only be (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  38. Ronald Bailey (2001). Deciding About Your Health Care: The Ethicist as Policy-Maker. [REVIEW] Health Care Analysis 9 (3):265-281.score: 54.0
    The author demonstrates that professional bioethics is culturally very risk averse when it comes to evaluating the possible ethical consequences of new technologies such as genetic testing, human embryonic stem cells, and reproductive cloning. Deeper involvement in the Federal regulatory process by bioethicists will exacerbate this tendency toward risk aversion. This cultural bias toward caution will tempt many bioethicists to look to the so-called precautionary principle for policy guidance. Adopting the precautionary principle would harm patients by slowing the development (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  39. R. West (1988). Ethical Aspects of Genetic Disease and Genetic Counselling. Journal of Medical Ethics 14 (4):194-197.score: 54.0
    With the reduction in diseases due to nutritional deficiencies and infection, disorders which are wholly or partly genetic are becoming relatively more important in all branches of modern medicine. Genetic counselling has developed in recent years from just explaining to an individual or a couple the risk of them producing a handicapped child, to the possibility in many cases of better diagnosis and active intervention to reduce the risks. At the same time antenatal screening programmes have been (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  40. M. Lastochkina (2012). Exactly How Should Christians Be Uneasy About Germ-Line Genetic Engineering? A Response to David Jones. Christian Bioethics 18 (2):163-170.score: 54.0
    In his attempt to assess the evasive uneasiness associated with germ-line genetic engineering (GGE), David Jones turns his exploration of explicitly theological objections into a case for unconditional rejection: even intended curative instances would have an underlying ontological malice of identifying and bringing into existence those who are, as it were, unidentified and not planned by God for future existence. His argument raises the questions of how exactly is each of us “identified” by God, and whether any increase in (...)
    Direct download (11 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  41. Mairi Levitt & Elisa Pieri, 'It Could Just Be an Additional Test Couldn't It?':Genetic Testing for Susceptibility to Aggression and Violence.score: 54.0
    Much of the current genetic research into aggressive and violent behaviour focuses on young people and might appear to offer the hope of targeted prediction and intervention. In the UK data is collected on children from various agencies and collated to produce ‘at risk of offending’ identities used to justify intervention. Information from behavioural genetic tests could conceivably be included. Regulatory frameworks for collecting, storing and using information from DNA samples differ between the health service and (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  42. D. A. Jones (2012). Germ-Line Genetic Engineering: A Critical Look at Magisterial Catholic Teaching. Christian Bioethics 18 (2):126-144.score: 54.0
    This article is written from within the Catholic, and more particularly the Augustinian/Thomist tradition of moral theology. It analyses the response of the Catholic Magisterium to the prospect of germline-genetic engineering (GGE). This is a very new issue and the Church has little definitive teaching on it. The statements of Popes and Vatican congregations or commissions have not settled the key questions. An analysis of theological themes drawn from secular writers points beyond pragmatic safety considerations toward intrinsic ethical limits (...)
    Direct download (11 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  43. Lainie Friedman Ross (2013). Predictive Genetic Testing of Children and the Role of the Best Interest Standard. Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 41 (4):899-906.score: 54.0
    The “best interest standard” is the guidance principle for pediatric healthcare in the United States (US) and the United Kingdom (UK). In the UK, the best interest standard may also be used as an intervention principle when parents make good but non-ideal decisions whereas intervention in the US requires a determination of abuse or neglect. I examine whether and how the different uses of the best interest standard influence predictive genetic testing of children.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  44. Donald S. Rubenstein (1998). Response to “Dimensions and Classification of Genetic Interventions in the Human Genome” by Matthew D. Bacchetta and Gerd Richter (CQ Vol. 5, No. 3). [REVIEW] Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 7 (01):90-93.score: 52.0
    In responding to our paper (CQ Vol 4., No. 3), Matthew D. Bacchetta and Gerd Richter include several misinterpretations and misrepresentations of our IVONT protocol and structure for ethical debate. We actively invited scrutiny of our IVONT protocol; however, for us to seriously respond to criticisms of our publication, we suggest respectfully that those who critique the article critique the protocol that we proposed. First and foremost, we certainly do not have a regarding mitochondrial genetics.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  45. Ruth F. Chadwick (2001). Genetic Interventions and Personal Identity. In. In H. Ten Have & Bert Gordijn (eds.), Bioethics in a European Perspective. Kluwer Academic Publishers. 339--349.score: 50.0
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  46. Norman Daniels (1998). Negative and Positive Genetic Interventions: Is There a Moral Boundary? Science in Context 11 (3-4).score: 50.0
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  47. Matthew D. Bacchetta & Gerd Richter (1996). Dimensions and Classification of Genetic Interventions in the Human Genome. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 5 (3):450-457.score: 50.0
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  48. Matthew DeCamp & Allen Buchanan (2007). Pt. VI. Genetics and Enhancement. Population Genetic Research and Screening: Conceptual and Ethical Issues / Eric Juengst ; Enhancement / Thomas Murray ; Genetic Interventions and the Ethics of Enhancement of Human Beings / Julian Savulescu ; Pharmacogenomics: Ethical and Regulatory Issues. [REVIEW] In Bonnie Steinbock (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Bioethics. Oxford University Press.score: 50.0
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  49. Julian Savulescu (2007). Genetic Interventions and the Ethics of Enhancement of Human Beings. In Bonnie Steinbock (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Bioethics. Oxford University Press. 516--535.score: 50.0
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
1 — 50 / 1000