Suchergebnisse

Radical life extension is the direct and intentional extension of the maximum human life span through hypothetical biotechnologies. Although no such technologies do currently exist, it is imperative to analyze whether they should be developed because they could have considerable effects on individuals and societal structures. This book provides a comprehensive ethical analysis of radical life extension by investigating its possible influence on human welfare. Effects resulting from the actions of isolated individuals, such as the satisfaction or frustration of certain desires, are taken into account as well as collective effects, such as an increased trend towards overpopulation. Topics that are not directly related to human welfare are covered as well, for example, human nature and human dignity, the right to life, and the relationship between aging and the meaning of life. The book concludes with an outline of policy recommendations for future research on life extension technologies

"Dieser Beitrag wird zwischen strukturellen Eigenschaften von Jugendquoten und Rechtfertigungen für ihre Einführung unterscheiden. Eine bloß strukturelle Gleichheit von Jugendquoten und Altersdiskriminierung sollte nicht hinreichend dafür sein, Jugendquoten als Altersdiskriminierung aufzufassen, da sie auch eine gerechtfertigte Form der Ungleichbehandlung sein könnten. Das bedeutet, dass zunächst geklärt werden sollte, ob eine solche strukturelle Gleichheit besteht und falls ja, ob sich plausible Rechtfertigungen für die Einführung von Jugendquoten finden lassen." (Autorenreferat)

Dieser Beitrag wird zwischen strukturellen Eigenschaften von Jugendquoten und
Rechtfertigungen für ihre Einführung unterscheiden.
Eine bloß strukturelle Gleichheit von Jugendquoten und Altersdiskriminierung sollte nicht hinreichend dafür sein, Jugendquoten als Altersdiskriminierung aufzufassen, da sie auch eine gerechtfertigte Form der Ungleichbehandlung sein könnten. Das bedeutet, dass zunächst geklärt werden sollte, ob eine solche strukturelle Gleichheit besteht und falls ja, ob sich plausible Rechtfertigungen für die Einführung von Jugendquoten finden lassen.

<b><i>Background:</i></b> Public involvement activities (PIAs) may contribute to the governance of ethically challenging biomedical research and innovation by informing, consulting with and engaging the public in developments and decision-making processes. For PIAs to capture a population's preferences (e.g. on issues in whole genome sequencing, biobanks or genome editing), a central methodological requirement is to involve a sufficiently representative subgroup of the general public. While the existing literature focusses on theoretical and normative aspects of 'representation', this study assesses empirically how such considerations are implemented in practice. It evaluates how PIA reports describe representation objectives, the recruitment process and levels of representation achieved. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> PIA reports were included from a systematic literature search if they directly reported a PIA conducted in a relevant discipline such as genomics, biobanks, biotechnology or others. PIA reports were analyzed with thematic text analysis. The text analysis was guided by an assessment matrix based on PIA-specific guidelines and frameworks. <b><i>Results:</i></b> We included 46 relevant reports, most focusing on issues in genomics. 27 reports (59%) explicitly described representation objectives, though mostly without adjusting eligibility criteria and recruiting methods to the specific objective. 11 reports (24%) explicitly reported to have achieved the intended representation; the rest either reported failure or were silent on this issue. <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> Representation of study samples in PIAs in biomedical research and innovation is currently not reported systematically. Improved reporting on representation would not only improve the validity and value of PIAs, but could also contribute to PIA results being used more often in relevant policy and decision-making processes.