En anglais

Evidence and ethics in biotechnology

Science · Scientific Inquiry · ages 23-24

Name ______________________ Date ____________

Which question asks for empirical evidence about a gain-of-function proposal?
- Who should decide which risks the wider community must accept?
- How much does the agent's activity change?
- How should benefits and burdens be shared among affected groups?
Which distinction explains a concern specific to germline editing?
- Descendants may inherit an edit without consenting to the original decision
- The patient may face unintended effects from the treatment
- Unequal access may limit who benefits from the treatment
Molecular cloning copies a DNA segment. Reproductive cloning produces an organism whose nuclear DNA largely matches a donor's.
Circle one: True False
When should a team discuss who may benefit or be harmed by its project?
- During planning, with renewed discussion as evidence or circumstances change
- After the design is fixed, when its ethical effects can be described
- At the final review, once the results show who could benefit
Why can experimental evidence alone not settle whether a risky study should proceed?
- More precise measurements are needed before ethics can be discussed
- Ethical questions concern opinions, so research evidence has little relevance
- Evidence informs the risks, but values guide which risks are acceptable
Which pairing matches the review roles taught here?
- IRB: accidental exposure; synthesis screening: participant consent
- IRB: human research consent; synthesis screening: DNA orders
- IRB: DNA orders; synthesis screening: containment
A lab proposes making a disease-causing bacterium better able to survive heat, to test heat-based cleaning. Which pair gives a supporting case and a concern that both follow from this increased function?
- For: test heat-based cleaning; against: the change may make bacteria less able to survive heating
- For: test heat-based cleaning against tougher bacteria; against: escaped bacteria could be harder to kill with heat
- For: easier heat disposal; against: survival findings could be misused
Two groups accept the same estimates of benefits, harms and uncertainty for a heritable edit but disagree on approval. Which explanation concerns values rather than facts?
- They predict different rates of unintended DNA changes
- They expect different numbers of descendants to inherit the edit
- They differ on what risks future people should bear

Answer key

For grown-ups. Fold this page away before handing over the rest.

Evidence and ethics in biotechnology W1-mt_U5OY2wvimB-s1

How much does the agent's activity change? · Measuring a change in the agent asks an empirical question. Authority and fair sharing also require value judgements.
Descendants may inherit an edit without consenting to the original decision · Possible inheritance adds a concern about descendants who could not consent. Treatment risks and unequal access can also raise concerns in somatic editing.
True · The statement distinguishes copying a selected DNA segment from producing an organism with a donor's nuclear genetic material.
During planning, with renewed discussion as evidence or circumstances change · Early discussion allows changes to the research question or design. Later changes in evidence or circumstances can require renewed assessment.
Evidence informs the risks, but values guide which risks are acceptable · Evidence helps assess expected benefits and harms. Deciding which risks are acceptable also requires ethical judgement.
IRB: human research consent; synthesis screening: DNA orders · IRBs assess protections in human research, including consent where required. Synthesis screening checks sequences and customers for concerns.
For: test heat-based cleaning against tougher bacteria; against: escaped bacteria could be harder to kill with heat · Greater heat survival could help test whether cleaning still works, but could make escaped bacteria harder to kill with heat. Both claims follow from the proposed change.
They differ on what risks future people should bear · What risks future people should bear is a value judgement. Predictions about unintended changes or inheritance numbers concern empirical outcomes.