Literature DB >> 11878345

Population genetics and benefit sharing.

B M Knoppers1.   

Abstract

The majority of international or national guidelines, specific to human genetics concentrate on actual or potential clinical applications. In contrast, the Ethics Committee of the Human Genome Organisation (HUGO) attempts to provide guidance to the bench scientists engaged in fundamental research in genomics prior to any clinical applications. Often confused as constituting the Human Genome Project (HGP) itself, HUGO's (Human Genome Organization) ultimate goal is to assist in the worldwide collaboration underpinning the HGP. It is an international organisation with 1,229 members in approximately 60 countries. The Ethics Committee is one of HUGO's six international advisory committees. Composed of experts from a number of countries and disciplines, the HUGO Ethics Committee promotes discussion and understanding of social, legal, and ethical issues as they relate to the conduct of, and knowledge derived from, the Genome Initiative. Currently, it has 13 members from 11 difference countries. It has produced statements on the conduct of genetic research, on cloning, and, has most recently presented a 'Statement on Benefit-Sharing', April 11, 2000. The Intellectual Property Committee of HUGO has been active in the controversial area of patenting. The issue of benefit-sharing is one that has its source in the mandate of both committees. How to avoid both commodification of the person through payment for access to DNA and biopiracy with no return to benefits to the families or community? While patents are a legitimate form of recognition for innovation, there seems to be no therapeutic exception to some of its stringent rules and the 'morality' exclusion has lain dormant. The HUGO 'Statement on Benefit-Sharing' examines the issues of defining community, common heritage, distributive justice and solidarity before arriving at its conclusions in benefit-sharing. This communication reviews some of these issues.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Genetics and Reproduction

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11878345     DOI: 10.1159/000051141

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Community Genet        ISSN: 1422-2795


  4 in total

1.  Genetic research and aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians.

Authors:  Emma Kowal; Glenn Pearson; Lobna Rouhani; Chris S Peacock; Sarra E Jamieson; Jenefer M Blackwell
Journal:  J Bioeth Inq       Date:  2012-10-12       Impact factor: 1.352

2.  A critique of the regulation of data science in healthcare research in the European Union.

Authors:  John M M Rumbold; Barbara K Pierscionek
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2017-04-08       Impact factor: 2.652

3.  Biobanking and public health: is a human rights approach the tie that binds?

Authors:  Eric M Meslin; Ibrahim Garba
Journal:  Hum Genet       Date:  2011-07-15       Impact factor: 4.132

Review 4.  A scoping review of considerations and practices for benefit sharing in biobanking.

Authors:  Allan Sudoi; Jantina De Vries; Dorcas Kamuya
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2021-07-27       Impact factor: 2.652

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.