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