Gene editing to enhance humans’ adaptability to climate change should consider safety, harm to be averted, succeeding generations, and social consequences.
AMA J Ethics. 2017;19(12):1186-1192. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2017.19.12.stas1-1712.
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.
Deception’s justifiability might depend on clinicians’ commitment to solidarity and awareness of social determinants of patients’ vulnerability to HIV infection.
AMA J Ethics. 2021;23(5):E382-387. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2021.382.
Rayner Kay Jin Tan, Jane Mingjie Lim, MSW, and Jeremiah Kah Wai Chan, MSc
Merits and drawbacks of U = U messaging are ethically and clinically complex, and drawbacks could harm patients in whom viral suppression is hard to achieve.
AMA J Ethics. 2021;23(5):E418-422. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2021.418.
Deborah M. Eng, MS, MA and Scott J. Schweikart, JD, MBE
A just culture perspective suggests that punitive responses to those who err should be reserved for those who have willfully and irremediably caused harm.
AMA J Ethics. 2020;22(9):E779-783. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2020.779.