The Holocaust and the racial hygiene doctrine that helped rationalize it still overshadow contemporary debates about using gene editing for disease prevention.
AMA J Ethics. 2021;23(1):E49-54. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2021.49.
Kyle B. Brothers, MD, PhD and Esther E. Knapp, MD, MBE
Direct-to-consumer genetic testing requires that physicians share decision making with patients, not order unnecessary tests or interventions, and refer to genetic specialists when necessary.
AMA J Ethics. 2018;20(9):E812-818. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2018.812.
Rebekah Davis Reed, PhD, JD and Erik L. Antonsen, PhD, MD
Though the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s collection of disaggregated genetic data for occupational surveillance and research raises numerous privacy concerns, the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 allows genetic information to be used to develop personal pharmaceuticals.
AMA J Ethics. 2018;20(9):E849-856. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2018.849.
Chromosomal microarray analysis reveals many gene variants of unknown significance. The uncertainty about these variants—might they be deleterious or are they benign?—complicates genetic counseling.
The American Medical Association Code of Medical Ethics’ opinions on physicians’ self-referral and physicians’ sale of health-related and non-health-related products from their offices.
AMA J Ethics. 2015;17(8):739-743. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2015.17.8.coet1-1508.
While critics of section 6001 of the ACA warn that it will debilitate an important competitive force in the marketplace, it does not categorically eliminate further development of the physician-owned hospital industry.