Germline edits: Trust ethics review process

Nature 520 (2015)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Summary: Edward Lanphier and colleagues contend that human germline editing is an unethical technology because it could have unpredictable effects on future generations. In our view, such misgivings do not justify their proposed moratorium.

Links

PhilArchive

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The Ethics of Germline Gene Editing.Gyngell Christopher, Douglas Thomas & Savulescu Julian - 2017 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 34 (4):498-513.
The sales process and the paradoxes of trust.G. Oakes - 1990 - Journal of Business Ethics 9 (8):671 - 679.
Trust in scientific publishing.Harry Hummels & Hans E. Roosendaal - 2001 - Journal of Business Ethics 34 (2):87 - 100.
Creating Trust.Robert C. Solomon - 1998 - Business Ethics Quarterly 8 (2):205-232.
The Ethical Limits of Trust in Business Relations.Bryan W. Husted - 1998 - Business Ethics Quarterly 8 (2):233-248.
Trust and Strategic Rationality.Bernd Lahno - 1995 - Rationality and Society 7 (4):442-464.
Trust in Science: CRISPR–Cas9 and the Ban on Human Germline Editing.Stephan Guttinger - 2018 - Science and Engineering Ethics 24 (4):1077-1096.
Critical Review of the Trust-Building Process on the Korean Peninsula.Jongheon Byeon - 2013 - Journal of Ethics: The Korean Association of Ethics 1 (93):345-373.

Analytics

Added to PP
2018-03-15

Downloads
371 (#51,823)

6 months
69 (#62,477)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

Chris Gyngell
Australian National University
Julian Savulescu
Oxford University
Thomas Douglas
University of Oxford

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references