8 found
Order:
  1.  52
    Is selecting better than modifying? An investigation of arguments against germline gene editing as compared to preimplantation genetic diagnosis.Alix Lenia V. Hammerstein, Matthias Eggel & Nikola Biller-Andorno - 2019 - BMC Medical Ethics 20 (1):1-13.
    Recent scientific advances in the field of gene editing have led to a renewed discussion on the moral acceptability of human germline modifications. Gene editing methods can be used on human embryos and gametes in order to change DNA sequences that are associated with diseases. Modifying the human germline, however, is currently illegal in many countries but has been suggested as a ‘last resort’ option in some reports. In contrast, preimplantation genetic diagnosis is now a well-established practice within reproductive medicine. (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  2.  13
    Prioritisation and non-sentientist harms: reconsidering xenotransplantation ethics.Christian Rodriguez Perez, Edwin Louis-Maerten, Samuel Camenzind, Matthias Eggel, Kirsten Persson & David Shaw - 2024 - Journal of Medical Ethics 50 (11):734-735.
    Rodger et al have interestingly argued that xenotransplantation should, if possible, entail the use of genetic pain disenhancement to prevent otherwise unavoidable pain in ‘donor’ animals.1 Their argument relies on the empirical assumption that xenotransplantation offers a realistic solution to organ shortage, and that, due to the recent clinical developments and the lack of human donors, it will thus continue for the foreseeable future. We argue below that other options should be prioritised over xenotransplantation, and that so-called ‘non-sentientist’ harms are (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  3. Ethical Emergency Planning in Animal Research Facilities: Lessons from the Pandemic.Angela K. Martin & Matthias Eggel - 2024 - Journal of Applied Animal Ethics Research.
    In this article, we discuss the ethics of research suspensions in animal research facilities and the consequent (mis)treatment of laboratory animals during emergencies. Through a case study from Switzerland during the COVID-19 pandemic, we articulate ethical principles and moral considerations that ought to guide the treatment and care of laboratory animals within animal research facilities during emergencies. They include a principle of preparedness, the importance of recognizing animal laboratory personnel as essential workers and conducting a Harm-Benefit Analysis in the case (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  4.  47
    Reevaluating Benefits in the Moral Justification of Animal Research: A Comment on “Necessary Conditions for Morally Responsible Animal Research”.Matthias Eggel, Carolyn P. Neuhaus & Herwig Grimm - 2020 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 29 (1):131-143.
    :In a recent paper in Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics on the necessary conditions for morally responsible animal research David DeGrazia and Jeff Sebo claim that the key requirements for morally responsible animal research are an assertion of sufficient net benefit, a worthwhile-life condition, and a no-unnecessary-harm condition. With regards to the assertion of sufficient net benefit, the authors claim that morally responsible research offers unique benefits to humans that outweigh the costs and harms to humans and animals. In this (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  5. (1 other version)Limited Aggregation for Resolving Human-Wildlife Conflicts.Matthias Eggel & Angela K. Martin - 2022 - Ethics, Policy and Environment 1.
    Human-wildlife interactions frequently lead to conflicts – about the fair use of natural resources, for example. Various principled accounts have been proposed to resolve such interspecies conflicts. However, the existing frameworks are often inadequate to the complexities of real-life scenarios. In particular, they frequently fail because they do not adequately take account of the qualitative importance of individual interests, their relative importance, and the number of individuals affected. This article presents a limited aggregation account designed to overcome these shortcomings and (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  6. Limited aggregation and zoonotic disease outbreaks.Angela K. Martin & Matthias Eggel - 2022 - Transforming Food Systems: Ethics, Innovation and Responsibility. Eursafe Conference Proceedings.
    Human and animal interests are often in conflict. In many situations, however, it is unclear how to evaluate and weigh competing human and animal interests, as the satisfaction of the interests of one group often inevitably occurs at the expense of those of the other group. Human-animal conflicts of this kind give rise to ethical questions. If animals count morally for their own sake, then we must ask in which cases the satisfaction or frustration of the interests of humans and (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  7.  13
    The Road to Hell Is Paved with Good Intentions: Why Harm-Benefit Analysis and Its Emphasis on Practical Benefit Jeopardizes the Credibility of Research.Herwig Grimm, Matthias Eggel, Anna Https://Orcidorg Deplazes-Zemp & Nikola Https://Orcidorg Biller-Andorno - 2017 - Animals 70 (7).
    It is our concern that European Union Directive 2010/63/EU with its current project evaluation of animal research in the form of a harm-benefit analysis may lead to an erosion of the credibility of research. The HBA assesses whether the inflicted harm on animals is outweighed by potential prospective benefits. Recent literature on prospective benefit analysis prioritizes "societal benefits" that have a foreseeable, positive impact on humans, animals, or the environment over benefit in the form of knowledge. In this study, we (...)
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  8.  20
    Professionals in Food Chains.Matthias Eggel, Christian Dürnberger & Svenja Springer - 2019 - Food Ethics 3 (1-2):1-4.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark