By Daniel Goldberg
The nirvana fallacy “is the informal fallacy of comparing actual things with unrealistic, idealized alternatives.” Practice and policy guided by the nirvana fallacy discourages any action at all short of a perfect solution.
Sound familiar? It’s one justification for pandemic policy inaction in a nutshell.
By Matthew Chun
He Jiankui — a high-profile Chinese scientist convicted for conducting unethical gene-editing experiments — has been released from prison and is currently fundraising for his new gene therapy endeavor. As the scientific community grapples with how to respond, theories of criminal justice can provide important perspectives to better inform the conversation surrounding Dr. He’s return to research.
By Leslie C. Griffin
You will be surprised I’ve been through all the experiences described in this post, and that I’m still alive to tell you about them. Even I can’t believe it some days. It’s quite a list, so sometimes I mention it to my friends, so they will be as amazed as I am.
I am a lifelong academic, so I also think about what lessons they’ve taught me.
One is the philosophical principle of autonomy, which I regularly teach in my bioethics class. In my opinion, it means you always have to be prepared for the very worst. You have to live knowing it could happen to you. The worst doesn’t always occur. But when it does, you need to find a positive way to look at it and to make good decisions about it.
Two is the practical decision to have your legal documents in place. A durable power of attorney. Health insurance and property insurance. These practical items also help a lot in getting you through terrible situations. Lack of insurance makes everything dreadful.
Autonomy and insurance help you through a lot of crises. My crises include a blizzard, a tornado, an earthquake, a car accident, a hurricane, and two murderers.
You also need good luck.
By Chloe Reichel
As 2022 draws to a close, we’re looking back at the top ten most-read articles published on Bill of Health this year.
Browse the list below.
This article is adapted slightly from remarks the author delivered at the 2022 International Neuroethics Society annual meeting on a panel about neurorehabilitation moderated by Dr. Joseph Fins.
By Leslie C. Griffin
I’m a tenured law professor at UNLV. This semester I’m teaching Bioethics and Constitutional Law.
I am healthy, happy, working, and working out.
But I went through hell to be here.
Why? Because twice, doctors told members of my family that due to brain injury, I was about to die. Or if I lived, I would probably live in rehab the rest of my life because I would not be able to work again.
By Matthew Chun
A scientist’s high-tech approach to assisted suicide is already available for use in Switzerland and is actively being campaigned for in the United Kingdom. . . Could the United States be next?
By Myrisha S. Lewis
Despite religious and ethical objections, assisted reproductive technology (ART), including in vitro fertilization and egg freezing, manages to flourish in the United States, with some states and companies even creating regimes for its insurance coverage. However, reproductive genetic innovation — a term I use to refer to the combination of assisted reproduction with genetic modification or substitution — has yet to receive the same acceptance. Examples of reproductive genetic innovation include mitochondrial transfer, cytoplasmic transfer, and germline gene editing.
Moreover, while many scientists, regulators, and members of the public have called for societal discourse or consensus related to individual reproductive genetic innovation techniques, these calls rarely include an explanation as to how these discourses would be conducted. In a recent article, Normalizing Reproductive Genetic Innovation, I offer four potential avenues for structuring a societal discourse in the U.S. on the topic.
The Petrie-Flom Center for Health Law Policy, Biotechnology, and Bioethics at Harvard Law School, the Harvard Law School Project on Disability (HPOD), and the Disability-Inclusive Climate Action Research Programme (DICARP) at McGill Law Faculty are pleased to announce a call for submissions for the following digital symposium hosted by Bill of Health:
By Donrich Thaldar
South Africans have issued a clarion call for research to move ahead on health-related applications of heritable human genome editing (HHGE), finds my research group’s new public engagement study — the first of its kind in Africa.
The study engaged a diverse group of 30 South Africans in three evenings of deliberations on the governance of HHGE. The methodology entailed (a) facilitated deliberation between the participants with the aim of finding consensus, although consensus was not forced; and (b) ensuring well-informed deliberations by providing participants with balanced, internationally peer-reviewed information about HHGE and the ethical arguments relating to it. The results of these deliberations are summarized briefly below.
By Aparajita Lath
The Truth Pill, authored by Dinesh Thakur and Prashant Reddy, is a monumental work that convincingly shows that drug regulation is but a myth in India.
In their investigative style, the authors explain drug regulation in India through the lens of history, both Indian and global. The book’s combination of history and contemporary issues makes for an immersive and compelling read. It may, however, leave you feeling frightened, given the dysfunctional regulatory system in India and the impact this can have on patients around the world. However, the book not only highlights problems but also offers several well-thought-out and actionable paths to reform.