Clara C. Hildebrandt, MD and Jonathan M. Marron, MD, MPH
Gene editing with CRISPR/Cas9 raises concerns about equitable access to therapies that could limit research participation by minority group members. These concerns can be addressed through public education, transparency, and stakeholder partnerships.
AMA J Ethics. 2018;20(9):E826-833. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2018.826.
Holly K. Tabor, PhD and Aaron Goldenberg, PhD, MPH
Rare genetic disease research has something to teach precision medicine about addressing some patients’ limited access to treatment. Health disparities exacerbated by high costs and limited availability of drugs can, perhaps, be mitigated when patient activism accelerates drug development.
AMA J Ethics. 2018;20(9):E834-840. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2018.834.
If health information is private, why do we know so much about Prince’s death? Critical legal and ethical questions remain unsettled about whether and when it is appropriate for medical examiners or coroners to release information from autopsy reports to the public.
AMA J Ethics. 2016;18(8):839-842. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2016.18.8.msoc2-1608.
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.
Dr Kaarkuzhali B. Krishnamurthy joins Ethics Talk to discuss her article: “Should Physicians Be Able to Refuse to Care for Patients Insured by Medicare?”
Makenzie Doubek joins Ethics Talk to discuss her article, coauthored with Scott J. Schweikart: “Why Should Physicians Care About What Law Says About Turfing and Dumping Patients?”