新興人體胚胎研究技術、 十四天規則和胚胎的特殊地位

IF 0.1 4区 哲学 Q4 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE International Journal of Chinese & Comparative Philosophy of Medicine Pub Date : 2021-12-21 DOI:10.24112/ijccpm.191941
K. Matthews, Sam Lowe, A. Iltis
{"title":"新興人體胚胎研究技術、 十四天規則和胚胎的特殊地位","authors":"K. Matthews, Sam Lowe, A. Iltis","doi":"10.24112/ijccpm.191941","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in English ; abstract also in Chinese.\n胚胎研究的"十四天規則"已經在國際上實施了幾十年。當前,很多科學家正在挑戰這一限制,因為技術進步使得人類胚胎和胚胎的細胞模型可以培養到其早期發育階段的後期。一些學者質疑人們長期以來持有的胚胎研究應該受到限制的信念,即超過十四天的胚胎研究是不道德的,他們開始提出替代性指導方針。本文通過回顧“十四天規則”的歷史和受這一規則影響的新興研究領域的情況,審查一項新的關於人類胚胎和類胚胎的指南。我們表明社會和政治哲學、形而上學和倫理學所關注的問題對於解釋和應用新的建議或開發替代方案具有核心作用。至關重要的是,科學家在突破十四天的限制去做任何研究之前,應該制訂明確的、深思熟慮的、且有文化敏感性的指導方針,包括具體限制和監督程式,以確保科學能夠適當地回應社會的需求和價值判斷。\nAfter 40 years of abiding by an international guideline that barred human embryo research beyond day 14 of embryonic development, many scientists are now challenging this limit due to technological advances suggesting that embryos and cell-based models of embryos can be cultured to later points in early development. Some scholars have questioned the long-held belief that research beyond 14 days is unethical and have begun proposing alternative guidelines for research. In this paper, we examine a proposal for new human embryo and embryoid guidelines by reviewing the history of the 14-day limit and emerging areas of research that are impacted by these guidelines. We then show how social and political philosophy, metaphysics, and ethics are central to interpreting and applying these new recommendations or developing alternatives. Before conducting any research beyond day 14, scientists must develop clear, thoughtful, and culturally sensitive guidelines that include limitations and oversight procedures to ensure that science responds to societal needs and values.","PeriodicalId":41284,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Chinese & Comparative Philosophy of Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Chinese & Comparative Philosophy of Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24112/ijccpm.191941","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in English ; abstract also in Chinese. 胚胎研究的"十四天規則"已經在國際上實施了幾十年。當前,很多科學家正在挑戰這一限制,因為技術進步使得人類胚胎和胚胎的細胞模型可以培養到其早期發育階段的後期。一些學者質疑人們長期以來持有的胚胎研究應該受到限制的信念,即超過十四天的胚胎研究是不道德的,他們開始提出替代性指導方針。本文通過回顧“十四天規則”的歷史和受這一規則影響的新興研究領域的情況,審查一項新的關於人類胚胎和類胚胎的指南。我們表明社會和政治哲學、形而上學和倫理學所關注的問題對於解釋和應用新的建議或開發替代方案具有核心作用。至關重要的是,科學家在突破十四天的限制去做任何研究之前,應該制訂明確的、深思熟慮的、且有文化敏感性的指導方針,包括具體限制和監督程式,以確保科學能夠適當地回應社會的需求和價值判斷。 After 40 years of abiding by an international guideline that barred human embryo research beyond day 14 of embryonic development, many scientists are now challenging this limit due to technological advances suggesting that embryos and cell-based models of embryos can be cultured to later points in early development. Some scholars have questioned the long-held belief that research beyond 14 days is unethical and have begun proposing alternative guidelines for research. In this paper, we examine a proposal for new human embryo and embryoid guidelines by reviewing the history of the 14-day limit and emerging areas of research that are impacted by these guidelines. We then show how social and political philosophy, metaphysics, and ethics are central to interpreting and applying these new recommendations or developing alternatives. Before conducting any research beyond day 14, scientists must develop clear, thoughtful, and culturally sensitive guidelines that include limitations and oversight procedures to ensure that science responds to societal needs and values.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
新兴人体胚胎研究技术、十四天规则和胚胎的特殊地位
LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in English;abstract also in Chinese.胚胎研究的"十四天规则"已经在国际上实施了几十年。当前,很多科学家正在挑战这一限制,因为技术进步使得人类胚胎和胚胎的细胞模型可以培养到其早期发育阶段的后期。一些学者质疑人们长期以来持有的胚胎研究应该受到限制的信念,即超过十四天的胚胎研究是不道德的,他们开始提出替代性指导方针。本文通过回顾“十四天规则”的历史和受这一规则影响的新兴研究领域的情况,审查一项新的关于人类胚胎和类胚胎的指南。我们表明社会和政治哲学、形而上学和伦理学所关注的问题对于解释和应用新的建议或开发替代方案具有核心作用。至关重要的是,科学家在突破十四天的限制去做任何研究之前,应该制订明确的、深思熟虑的、且有文化敏感性的指导方针,包括具体限制和监督程序,以确保科学能够适当地响应社会的需求和价值判断。After 40 years of abiding by an international guideline that barred human embryo research beyond day 14 of embryonic development,many scientists are now challenging this limit due to technological advances suggesting that embryos and cell-based models of embryos can be cultured to later points in early development.Some scholars have questioned the long-held belief that research beyond 14 days is unethical and have begun proposing alternative guidelines for research.In this paper,we examine a proposal for new human embryo and embryoid guidelines by reviewing the history of the 14-day limit and emerging areas of research that are impacted by these guidelines.We then show how social and political philosophy,metaphysics,and ethics are central to interpreting and applying these new recommendations or developing alternatives.Before conducting any research beyond day 14,scientists must develop clear,thoughtful,and culturally sensitive guidelines that include limitations and oversight procedures to ensure that science responds to societal needs and values.
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
8
期刊最新文献
重審中醫瘟疫理論在當代疫情危機中的認知價值和倫理效應 中國內地新冠疫情防控新做法的儒家反思 健康受試者的"艱難抉擇" 前言:抗疫——在倫理道德上我們還可以做什麼? 從道德心理學的進路初步探索「限肉令」的正當性
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1