Journal of Law and the Biosciences最新文献

Numerous cryopreserved surplus embryos are being stored in IVF units in Western countries. IVF patients are required to choose and consent to disposition options for their surplus embryos upon starting treatment. We focus on the option of embryo donation to others for reproductive purposes. The terminology used for this practice is inconsistent, as the term embryo 'donation' is used interchangeably with embryo 'adoption' in different jurisdictions, government programs, and by private initiatives. Our main argument is that the selected terminology bears conceptual and other consequences for public attitudes, in a way which affects the choice of such a surplus embryo-disposition-option. More specifically, we contend that the pairing of 'embryo-adoption' is misguided. We identify material, legal, and policy-related points of distinction between the practices of donation and adoption. Then, we discuss the importance of choosing the right terminology, given its power to influence the perception of embryo donation/adoption, and analyze conceptual differences between the two terms, finding only 'donation' to be fit for purpose. Next, relying on findings from an empirical study, we consider the effect of the non-personhood of the embryo on the appropriateness of each term. Subsequently, we distinguish donation from adoption and justify why the former is more appropriate.

Enacted primarily to encourage patents on federally funded inventions, an additional policy objective of the Bayh-Dole Act is to increase visibility around scientific discoveries made with US government support. The Bayh-Dole Act requires federal grantees to disclose subject inventions to funding agencies and declare government support in their patents. Prior research has shown, however, that hundreds of grantees have failed to declare federal funding in biomedical patents, and others have acknowledged government support several years late through certificates of corrections. Combining data from the National Institutes of Health and the Patent and Trademark Office, this study explores the extent to which grantees have declared government support late through certificates of corrections and likely reasons why this occurred. Over 3000 patents covering federally funded inventions have been corrected to acknowledge government support late, most in recent years. Many of these corrections appear to have been driven by high-profile controversies, changes in the Bayh-Dole regulations, and civil society advocacy. These findings call for policies to encourage timely compliance with invention reporting requirements and to increase the visibility of late acknowledgements of US government funding.

One way to ensure adequate legal protection against existing and emerging forms of mental interference is by specifying the human right to mental integrity. This paper considers three possible constructions of the scope of this right in human rights law. It argues that the Mental Control View and the Direct Harmful Interference View fall short of providing a persuasive definition of the right. Rather, it is proposed to construct the scope of the right along the lines of the Significant Mental Interference View. Meanwhile, the directness of a mental interference and the psychological harm it entails are plausibly relevant factors to the potential justification of rights infringements.

The capacity-building mechanism in the Biosafety Protocol aims to assist the parties, inter alia, in establishing and implementing national measures concerning genetically modified organisms (GMOs) that are aligned with the objectives of the Biosafety Protocol. Regulatory capacities of developing countries to address environmental risks caused by GMOs remain to be improved. The article takes China as an example to analyze how regulatory capacity-building activities organized under the Biosafety Protocol contributed to and will further influence China's establishment and implementation of GMO laws and regulations. A four-stage analytical framework is established to examine the interaction between capacity-building activities and the development of China's GMO regulation. China has gradually developed its GMO laws and regulations, with each stage having different regulatory needs and capacity-building efforts. External intervention and endogenous regulatory capacity-building activities mutually strengthened China's implementation of the Biosafety Protocol. Endogenous regulatory capacity-building activities are increasing in enhancing China's GMO regulation. The article concludes by proposing ways to enhance China's regulatory capacities regarding GMOs against the backdrop of adopting the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework and China's Biosecurity Law, involving making laws and regulations on GMOs consistent with the Biosecurity Law and reconsidering the regulatory modes on genome-editing techniques.

Human embryo-like structures (ELSs) are novel entities emulating aspects of embryogenesis to advance understanding of early human life and enable future clinical applications. ELSs frequently fall into a regulatory gap: the laws that govern embryo research do not commonly apply, but nor are there bespoke regulatory schemes. There is international consensus that the gap must be addressed, but disagreement as to when and how this should be achieved. To date ELSs model embryos, mimicking aspects of embryonic development. In 2024 a UK Nuffield Council on Bioethics report recommended that these `stem cell-based embryo models' should be regulated separately to embryos. Building on this report, this paper considers a subset of ELSs that may in future lose their model status because they replicate rather than model embryos. Distinguishing between models and replicas it considers what circumstances, in the UK and internationally, would require regulation as an embryo, the circumstances in which replicas might justifiably be regulated separately to embryos and why maintaining distinct regulatory paths for embryos and ELSs is beneficial.

Genome editing technology is rapidly advancing and has generated significant controversy, particularly in the field of human heritable genome editing, while also presenting vast potential applications. Following the He Jiankui incident in 2018, there was a global call to reinforce the regulatory frameworks governing human germline and heritable genome editing. China's existing regulatory framework for human genome editing has improved with several laws enacted and updated, but there are shortcomings. These include overlapping responsibilities of multiple governing agencies and limited involvement of patient groups and the public in the legislative process. By drawing insights from regulatory agencies, legislation, and multigroup participation from abroad, especially in the United Kingdom and the United States, we can compare the differences between China and foreign countries and help China enhance its regulatory framework based on international practices. This article proposes recommendations for enhancing China's regulatory framework, such as clarifying the responsibilities of agencies, updating policies in a timely manner, strengthening bioethics education and training, and emphasizing the need for a forward-looking, balanced, meticulous, and adaptable regulatory approach.

Federated Learning (FL) promises to enhance data-driven health research by enabling collaborative machine learning across distributed datasets without direct data exchange. However, current FL implementations primarily reflect the data-sharing interests of institutional controllers rather than those of individual patients whose data are at stake. Existing consent mechanisms-like broad consent under HIPAA or explicit consent under the GDPR-fail to provide patients with control over how their data is used. This article explores the integration of smart contracts (SCs) into FL as a mechanism for automating, enforcing, and documenting consent in data transactions. SCs, encoded in decentralized ledger technologies, can ensure that FL processes align with patient preferences by providing an immutable, and dynamically updatable consent architecture. Integrating SCs into FL and swarm learning (SL) frameworks can mitigate ethico-legal concerns related to patient autonomy, data re-identification, and data use. This approach addresses persistent principle-agent asymmetries in biomedical data sharing by ensuring that patients, rather than data controllers alone, can specify the terms of access to insights derived from their health data. We discuss the implications of this model for regulatory compliance, data governance, and patient engagement, emphasizing its potential to foster public trust in health data ecosystems.

The rapid advancements in neuroscience highlight the pressing need to safeguard neural personal information (NPI). China has achieved significant progress in brain-computer interface technology and its clinical applications. Considering the intrinsic vulnerability of NPI and the paucity of legal scrutiny concerning NPI breaches, a thorough assessment of the adequacy of China's personal information protection legislation is essential. This analysis contends that NPI should be classified as sensitive personal information. The absence of bespoke provisions for NPI in current legislation underscores persistent challenges in its protection. To address these gaps, this work proposes the establishment of a concentric-circle hard-soft law continuum to support a hybrid governance model for NPI, rooted in fundamental human rights principles.

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a neurodegenerative disease with devastating personal and social consequences. In June 2021, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted accelerated approval to aducanumab (Aduhelm; Biogen), a first-in-class monoclonal antibody (mAb) for treatment of AD. In July 2021, responding to the significant controversy sparked by aducanumab's approval, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) opened a National Coverage Determination (NCD) analysis for mAbs intended for the treatment of AD. CMS received a record number of public comments on the proposed NCD, which included a proposal for coverage with evidence development (CED). We undertook an in-depth qualitative analysis of those comments. Broad themes included: the appropriateness of FDA's approval of aducanumab; the nature of the relationship between CMS and FDA; anticipated downstream effects of CED on innovation and health equity; aducanumab's cost, value, and affordability; and whether aducanumab offered patients hope. The aducanumab controversy occurred at the intersection of multiple contentious issues; in the discussion, we contextualize our findings within these broader debates. Though Biogen pulled aducanumab from the market in early 2024, the effects of the public discourse surrounding its approval and coverage have been long-lasting and far-reaching, affecting health law, policy, and clinical practice.