Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Altering humans: The case for and against human gene therapy

  • Article
  • Published:
Monash Bioethics Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The cases for and against somatic gene therapy, germ-line gene therapy and gene therapy for enhancement are assessed. It is argued that none of these kinds of therapy is inherently wrong, and that an adequate assessment should consist in weighing risks and benefits. On this basis, it is argued that somatic therapy is a promising new kind of treatment that we should welcome; that we have technologies available that make germ-line therapy superfluous, unless we want to engage in enhancement engineering; and that although we should be extremely cautious if we were to engage in enhancement engineering, we cannot categorically rule out that there might be cases in which this kind of therapy should be applied, e.g. if it was the only way of saving millions of lives.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. D.S. Salsburg, “The Religion of Statistics as Practiced in Medical Journals,” American Statistician, 39 (1985): 220–23.

    Google Scholar 

  2. K.J. Rothman and K.B. Michels, “The Continuing Unethical Use of Placebo Controls,” N. Engl. J. Med., 331 (1994): 394–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. J.J. Sramek and N.R. Cutler, letter, comment, “The Use of Placebo Controls,” N. Engl J. Med., 332 (1995): 62; W.F. Denny, letter, comment, “The Use of Placebo Controls,” N. Engl. J. Med., 332 (1995): 61–62; R. Pohl and R. Balon, letter, comment; discussion, “The Use of Placebo Controls,” N. Engl. J. Med., 332 (1995): 61–62; E.M. Gilbert and M. Packer, letter, comment; discussion, “The Use of Placebo Controls,” N. Engl. J. Med., 332 (1995): 62–62; H.R. Taylor, letter, comment; discussion. “The Use of Placebo Controls,” N. Engl. J. Med., 332 (1995): 60–62; C. Schecter letter, comment; discussion, “The Use of Placebo Controls,” N. Engl. J. Med., 332 (1995): 60–62; S. Cagliano and G. Traversa, letter, comment; discussion, “The Use of Placebo Controls,” N. Engl. J. Med., 332 (1995): 60–62; and D.A. Solomon, letter, comment; discussion, “The Use of Placebo Controls,” N. Engl. J. Med., 332 (1995): 60–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. M. Markman, “When Regulatory Requirements Conflict with Ethical Study Design: The Case of Oral Ondansetron,” Cancer Investigation, 12 (1994): 654–56; W.L. Peterson and J. Elashoff, “Placebos in Clinical Trials of Duodenal Ulcer: The End of an Era?,” Gastroenterology, 79 (1980): 585–88; R.J. Levine, “The Use of Placebos in Randomized Clinical Trials,” IRB: A Review of Human Subjects Research, 17, no. 2 (1985): 1–4; and B. Freedman, “Placebo-Controlled Trials and the Logic of Clinical Purpose,” IRB: A Review of Human Subjects Research, 12, no. 6 (1990): 1–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. S. Bok. Lying: Moral Choice in Public and Private Life (New York: Vintage Books, 1978): at 61–68.

    Google Scholar 

  6. R.J. Levine, Ethics and Regulation of Clinical Research (Baltimore: Urban and Schwarzenberg, 2nd ed., 1986): at 229–30.

  7. R. Temple, “Difficulties in Evaluating Positive Control Trials,” Proceedings of the American Statistical Association, (1983): 1–7.

  8. J.C. Bailar, “Introduction,” in S.H. Shapiro and T.A. Louis, eds., Clinical Trials: Issues and Approaches (New York: Marcel Dekker, 1983): 1–12; and L.M. Friedman, C.D. Furberg, and D.L. DeMets, Fundamentals of Clinical Trials (Littleton: PSG Publishing, 2nd ed., 1985): 1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  9. S.B. Peruck and L.E. Hinkle, “The Effect of Expectation on Response to Phenmetrazine,” Psychosomatic Medicine, 26 (1964): 369–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. A.J. Dinnerstein and J. Haim, “Modification of Placebo Effects by Means of Drugs,” Journal of Abnormal and Sociological Psychology, 75 (1970): 308–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. L. Lasagna, V.G. Laties, and J.L. Dohan, “Further Studies on the ‘Pharmacology’ of Placebo Administration,” Journal of Clinical Investigation, 37 (1958): 533–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. K. Schapira et al., “Study on the Effects of Tablet Colour in the Treatment of Anxiety States,” British Medical Journal, 1 (1970): 446–49; E.C. Huskisson, “Simple Analgesics for Arthritis,” British Medical Journal, 4 (1974): 196–200; P.E. Lucchelli, A.D. Cuttaneo, and J. Zattoni, “Effect of Capsule Colour and Order of Administration of Hypnotic Treatments,” European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 13 (1978): 153–55; and L.W. Buckalew and K.E. Coffield, “An Investigation of Drug Expectancy as a Function of Capsule Color and Size Preparation Form,” Journal of Clinical Psychopharmacology, 2 (1982): 245–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. S. Schindel, “The Placebo Dilemma,” European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 13 (1978): 231–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. P.G. Ney, C. Collines, and C. Spensor, “Double Blind: Double Talk or Are There Ways to Do Better Research,” Medical Hypotheses, 21 (1986): 119–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Id.

  16. K. White et al., reply to letter, “Side Effects and the ‘Blindability’ of Clinical Drug Trials,” American Journal of Psychiatry, 150(1993): 1760–61.

    Google Scholar 

  17. S. Fisher and R.P. Greenberg, “How Sound is the Double Blind Design for Evaluating Psychotropic Drugs?,” Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 181 (1993): 345–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. T.S. Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2nd ed., 1970).

    Google Scholar 

  19. D.A. Curson et al., “Does Short Term Placebo Treatment of Chronic Schizophrenia Produce Long Term Harm?,” British Medical Journal (Clinical Research Edition), 293 (1986): 726–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. S. Ross and L.W. Buckalew, “Placebo Agentry: Assessment of Drug and Placebo Effects,” in L. White, B. Tursky, and G.E. Schwartz, eds., Placebo: Theory Research, and Mechanisms (New York: Guilford Press, 1985): 67–82.

    Google Scholar 

  21. A.S. Friedman, “Interaction of Drug Therapy with Marital Therapy in Depressive Patients,” Archives of General Psychiatry, 32 (1975): 19–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Fisher and Greenberg, supra note 17.

  23. Friedman, Furberg, and DeMets, supra note 8, at 84–88.

  24. L. Lasagna, “The Helsinki Declaration: Timeless Guide or Irrelevant Anachronism?,” Journal of Clinical Psychopharmacology, 15 (1995): 96–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Pohl and Balon, supra note 3.

  26. A Grunbaum, “Explication and Implications of the Placebo Concept,” in L. White, B. Tursky, G.E. Schwartz, eds., Placebo: Theory, Research, and Mechanisms (New York: Guildford Press, 1985): 9–36.

    Google Scholar 

  27. S. Yusuf, R. Collins, and R. Peto, “Why Do We Need Large, Simple Randomized Trials?” Statistics and Medicine, 3 (1984): 409–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Solomon, supra note 3.

  29. D. Henry and S. Hill, “Comparing Treatments,” British Medical Journal, 310 (1995): 1279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. B. Freedman, K.C. Glass, and C. Weijer, “Placebo Orthodoxy in Clinical Research II: Ethical, Legal, and Regulatory Myths,” Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 24 (1996): 252–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. P.E. Belchetz, “Drug Therapy: Hormonal Treatment of Postmenopausal Women,” N. Engl. J. Med., 330 (1994): 1062–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. U.A. Liberman, et al., “Effect of Oral Aledronate on Bone Mineral Density and the Incidence of Fractures in Postmenopausal Osteoporosis,” N. Engl. J. Med., 333 (1995): 1437–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. P.N. Sambrook, “The Treatment of Postmenopausal Osteoporosis,” N. Engl. J. Med., 333 (1995): 1495–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. R. Temple, “Government Viewpoint of Clinical Trials,” Drug Information Journal, Jan./Feb. (1982): 10–17.

  35. Id.

  36. Id.

  37. Id.

  38. P. Leber, “The Placebo Control in Clinical Trials (A View from the FDA),” Psychopharmacology Bulletin, 22 (1986): 30–32; and D. Addington, “The Use of Placebos in Clinical Trials for Acute Schizophrenia,” Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 40 (1995): 172–76.

    Google Scholar 

  39. W.C. Blackwelder, “‘Proving the Null Hypothesis’ in Clinical Trials,” Controlled Clinical Trials, 3 (1982): 345–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. T.R. Fleming, “Evaluation of Active Control Trials in AIDS,” Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes, 3 (1990): S82–S87.

    Google Scholar 

  41. M.L. Lee and J.M. Lusher, “The Problem of Therapeutic Equivalence with Paired Qualitative Data: An Example from a Clinical Trial Using Hemophiliacs with an Inhibitor to Factor VIII,” Statistics in Medicine, 10 (1991): 433–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. C. Rodary, C. Com-Nougue, and M.F. Tournade, “How to Establish Equivalence Between Treatments: A One-Sided Clinical Trial in Pediatric Oncology,” Statistics in Medicine, 8 (1989): 593–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. R. Makuch and M. Johnson, “Issues in Planning and Interpreting Active Control Equivalence Studies,” Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 42 (1989): 503–11; and Blackwelder, supra note 39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Blackwelder, supra note 39.

  45. A.K. Shapiro and L.A. Morris, “The Placebo Effect in Medical and Psychological Therapies,” in S.L. Garfield and A.E. Bergin, eds., Handbook of Psychotherapy and Behavior Change (New York: Wiley 1978): 369–410.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Friedman, Furberg, and DeMets, supra note 8, at 88–93.

  47. R. Makuch, and R. Simon, “Sample Size Requirements for Evaluating Conservative Therapy,” Cancer Treatment Reports, 62 (1978): 1037–40.

    Google Scholar 

  48. S.N. Young and L. Annable, “The Use of Placebos in Psychiatry: A Response to the Draft Document Prepared by the Tri-Council Working Group,” Journal of Psychiatry and Neuroscience, 21 (1996): 235–38.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Makuch and Johnson, supra note 43.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Philosophy, University of Copenhagen, Denmark

    Nils Holtug

Authors
  1. Nils Holtug
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Holtug, N. Altering humans: The case for and against human gene therapy. Monash Bioethics Review 16, 14 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03351207

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03351207

Keywords

Search

Navigation