PubMed Health⌕ Search

SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Recombinant DNA Advisory Committee”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 541 records · Page 30Linked to original sources
PubMed1996

Washington politics and genetic engineering research: when worlds collide.

In earlier research, I developed a notion of "biopolitics" to help explain, first, the recombinant DNA debate of the 1970-1980s, and, second, the human gene transfer-therapy debate of the 1980-1990s. Drawing upon results gleaned from two recent meetings of high moment in the nation's capital, I expand upon the theoretical and empirical parameters of the biopolitical argument to elucidate the clash of policy preferences arising from two new areas of genetic experimentation: (i) human embryo research and (ii) the creation of commercially viable therapeutics to combat disease. I show the manner in which members of the biological science community and their policy allies are forced to cope with the realities of the "Washington political game," and why it is necessary for them to develop a sophisticated sense of what that "game" is.

Advisory Committees↗
PubMed1990

The NIH "Points to Consider" and the limits of human gene therapy.

In this essay, I examine the sources and reach of the NIH "Points to Consider." These guidelines are based on normative considerations inherited from two sets of science policy deliberations that took place in the United States during the 1970s: the discussion of research with human subjects and the recombinant DNA debate. The combined lessons of those deliberations provide six criteria by which to evaluate human gene therapy proposals. While these criteria could be used to reject proposals to attempt germ-line gene therapy or enhancement engineering today, they provide no principled basis for publicly proscribing the development of these forms of genetic intervention. Instead, they will ultimately lead us to approach the moral limits of gene therapy as a professional policy question about the goals of medicine, rather than as a social policy question about the public good.

Advisory Committees↗