Flashing the Yellow Traffic Light: Choices Forced Upon Us by Gene Editing Technologies

The 2018 birth of two designer babies in China has sparked an immediate global controversy over the ethics of gene editing. For the longer range future, however, we must assess how CRISPR/Cas9, like so many other new bio-technologies, is forcing choice—moral choice—on a large scale. Gene editing for purposes of medical therapy, human enhancement, engineering of future children, and even creating a posthuman species, confront our society with the inescapable necessity of making moral choices. The task for churches in partnership with universities is not to decide in advance what is right or wrong. Rather, it is to prepare our people to make responsible choices.     

基因与环境的交互作用:来自差别易感性模型的证据

差别易感性模型认为,携带某种基因型的个体既容易受到消极环境的不利影响,同时也容易受到积极的、支持性环境的有利影响。随着定量遗传学和分子遗传学技术的不断发展,涌现出关于基因-环境对儿童发展交互作用的大量研究,主要包括5-HTTLPR、DRD4、MAOA、COMT和BDNF五种基因与环境因素(如,母亲敏感性、压力性生活事件和家庭养育环境等)对儿童发展的交互作用,支持了差别易感性模型。但是,关于基因与环境交互作用的机制、携带易感性基因个体的种族和性别差异问题以及优势敏感性假说的验证,都是该领域未来研究的重要方向。     

Partial replication of two rumination-related candidate gene studies

Two recent papers associated candidate genes with brooding rumination, a possible cognitive endophenotype for depression, in children ages 8–14 years. Stone et al. reported that BDNF val66met polymorphism predicted brooding in adolescence. Woody et al. reported that children carrying at least one copy of a CRHR1 TAT haplotype reported less brooding than their peers in the presence of maternal depression. We attempted to replicate and extend these findings in a sample of twins aged 12–16 years. We analyzed the BDNF val66met (rs6265) polymorphism and two (rs242924 and rs7209436) out of three single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) that Woody et al. used to create a CRHR1 haplotype. We controlled for maternal history of depression and clustering within families. Unlike Stone et al., we found higher brooding among BDNF Met carriers. This main effect was qualified by an interaction with pubertal status, with the effect driven by more physically mature participants. Similar to Woody et al., we found an interaction between CRHR1 SNPs and maternal depression, with the homozygous minor genotype acting as a protective factor against brooding in the presence of maternal depression. Findings provide partial support for the influence of candidate genes in two environmentally sensitive systems on brooding.     

心脏生物起搏器的研究现状及展望

心脏生物起搏器是近年来心脏起搏的研究热点,目前主要集中在三种基因治疗策略:(1)使心肌细胞的β2受体表达上调增加心率;(2)转染起搏电流基因使心室肌细胞产生自主起搏功能;(3)改变心室肌细胞钾电流的平衡,使心室肌细胞产生自律性.心脏生物起搏器应用于临床仍面临许多问题,但是随着分子生物学和基因工程技术的发展,心脏生物起搏器必将造福于人类.     

论保护基因隐私需要引入权利形式

基因技术的发展将基因隐私保护问题摆在人类面前,"采用怎样的方式才能有效保护基因隐私"是一个亟待解决的疑问.从分析侵犯基因隐私所带来的社会危害出发,对"权利形式是否适用于保护基因隐私"这一问题进行分析,并得出肯定性结论.     

人类行为遗传学的伦理问题

行为遗传学是试图定位与行为特性有关的特殊基因或基因组及了解基因与环境之间复杂关系的一种研究.行为遗传学是研究正常范围内的非病理变化,与人类疾病遗传学存在差异.行为遗传学研究面临许多伦理学问题,诸如,智力的遗传性,基因能否决定一切,生物社会学与人类文化评估,生命伦理学与行为遗传学的关系等,因此,对行为遗传学研究结果的阐述必须十分谨慎.     

生殖细胞基因增强技术的伦理争议与对策

分析生殖细胞基因增强的概念,论述支持和反对生殖细胞基因增强的理由,初步探讨伦理学对策.在人类理性的指引下,生殖细胞基因增强能够成为造福人类的有力武器.     

同性恋的进化心理学理论模型述评

关于同性恋的成因, 进化心理学家有不同的解释, 主要包括杂合优势、女性多产、超突变、亲族选择、群体选择、同盟形成以及父母操纵七种理论假说。在系统地介绍这些理论假说的基础上比较了各理论之间的优缺点, 并将其与其他流派的观点做对比, 以期发现更具说服力的模型。未来的研究应该注意同性恋的性别差异、影响性取向基因的确切位置等。     

MAOA基因与抑郁的关系

抑郁的发生具有遗传基础。近年来, 随着分子遗传技术的发展, 对抑郁遗传机制的研究已经深入到分子水平。既有研究表明, MAOA基因在抑郁的发生发展中发挥着十分重要的作用。MAOA基因与抑郁间存在紧密的直接关联, 而且MAOA基因与环境及其他基因亦交互作用于抑郁, 然而, 既有相关研究结论尚存分歧。未来研究应更加关注MAOA基因与多种环境因素及其它基因间的复杂交互作用, 考察MAOA基因的年龄效应, 揭示MAOA基因作用于抑郁的脑机制。     

Gene Concepts and Genethics: Beyond Exceptionalism

The discursive explosion that was provoked by the new genetics could support the impression that the ethical and social problems posed by the new genetics are somehow exceptional in their very nature. According to this view we are faced with special ethical and social problems that create a challenge so fundamental that the special label of genethics is needless to justify. The historical account regarding the evolution of the gene concepts could serve us to highlight the limits of what we know about genes and what we can do with genes. The widespread notion about the exceptionality of genetic knowledge and its applicative possibilities is hardly justifiable and leads to misunderstandings regarding the conceptualization of the ethical and social problems we might face. Following a more realistic interpretation of the role of genes in human life we might avoid a whole set of fictive dilemmas and counterproductive regulatory efforts in bioethics. Bioethical discourse should move from the gene-centered scientific discourse toward the more sophisticated and complex discourses where human development represented as a matter of complex interactions between genomes and environments, between genes, educational factors, nutritional regimes, and other different developmental resources. If a gene is seen as one among the different developmental resources that are shaping a given human trait then both genethics and genetic exceptionalism could hardly be represented as a justified approach in discussing the ethical and social problems of genetics.