Multiple pieces of reclaimed pallet wood are sculpted into a lateral cerebrum and a gradient of burned wood visually represents a crisis among health care professionals.
AMA J Ethics. 2020;22(1):E61-62. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2020.61.
Ruth M. Farrell, MD, MA, Marsha Michie, PhD, Christopher T. Scott, PhD, Rebecca Flyckt, MD, and Mary LaPlante, MD
One reason for neglect of women’s health as patients and subjects has been restrictions on uterine transfer of modified human embryos, a boundary that has now been crossed.
AMA J Ethics. 2019;21(12):E1071-1078. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2019.1071.
Tom Alsaigh, MD, Laura Nicholson, MD, PhD, and Eric Topol, MD
Clinicians should have a working understanding of gene editing, controversy surrounding its use, and its far-reaching clinical and ethical implications.
AMA J Ethics. 2019;21(12):E1089-1097. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2019.1089.
Gene editing reminds professionals and the public that this technology’s reach goes beyond treating somatic disease to germline consequences yet unknown.
AMA J Ethics. 2019;21(12):E1056-1058. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2019.1056.
Although advisory groups like the World Health Organization question whether certain forms of gene editing should be permitted, the US Patent Office routinely issues patents protecting this technology.
AMA J Ethics. 2019;21(12):E1049-1055. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2019.1049.