renzong qiu - Academia.edu (original) (raw)

Papers by renzong qiu

Nature, 2019

OBITUARY Walter Munk, oceanographer extraordinaire, remembered p.176 GERMLINE EDITING NIH endorse... more OBITUARY Walter Munk, oceanographer extraordinaire, remembered p.176 GERMLINE EDITING NIH endorses moratorium and academies plan next steps p.175 MEDICINE Could artificial intelligence put the care back into health care? p.172 MATERIALS Beyond graphene-three steps to more 2D semiconductors p.169

The Hastings Center Report, 1987

Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 1995

Philosophy and Medicine, 2004

Public Health Genomics, 2000

In view of the fact that for-profit enterprise exceeds public expenditures on genetic research an... more In view of the fact that for-profit enterprise exceeds public expenditures on genetic research and that benefits from the Human Genome Project may accrue only to rich people in rich nations, the HUGO Ethics Committee discussed the necessity of benefit-sharing. Discussions involved case examples ranging from single-gene to multifactorial disorders and included the difficulties of defining community, especially when multifactorial diseases are involved. The Committee discussed arguments for benefit-sharing, including common heritage, the genome as a common resource, and three types of justice: compensatory, procedural, and distributive. The Committee also discussed the importance of community participation in defining benefit, agreed that companies involved in health have special obligations beyond paying taxes, and recommended they devote 1–3% of net profits to healthcare infrastructure or humanitarian efforts.

Comptes Rendus de l'Académie des Sciences - Series III - Sciences de la Vie, 2001

A human being or person cannot be reduced to a set of human genes, or human genome. Genetic essen... more A human being or person cannot be reduced to a set of human genes, or human genome. Genetic essentialism is wrong, because as a person the entity should have self-conscious and social interaction capacity which is grown in an interpersonal relationship. Genetic determinism is wrong too, the relationship between a gene and a trait is not a linear model of causation, but rather a non-linear one. Human genome is a complexity system and functions in a complexity system of human body and a complexity of systems of natural/social environment. Genetic determinism also caused the issue of how much responsibility an agent should take for her/his action, and how much degrees of freedom will a human being have. Human genome research caused several conceptual issues. Can we call a gene 'good' or 'bad', 'superior' of 'inferior'? Is a boy who is detected to have the gene of Huntington's chorea or Alzheimer disease a patient? What should the term 'eugenics' mean? What do the terms such as 'gene therapy', 'treatment' and 'enhancement' and 'human cloning' mean etc.? The research of human genome and its application caused and will cause ethical issues. Can human genome research and its application be used for eugenics, or only for the treatment and prevention of diseases? Must the principle of informed consent/choice be insisted in human genome research and its application? How to protecting gene privacy and combating the discrimination on the basis of genes? How to promote the quality between persons, harmony between ethnic groups and peace between countries? How to establish a fair, just, equal and equitable relationship between developing and developed countries in regarding to human genome research and its application? © 2001 Académie des Sciences/Éditions scientifiques et médicales Elsevier SAS human genome project / genomics / genetic essentialism / genetic determinism / eugenics / informed consent / informed choice / gene privacy / gene discrimination / benefit-sharing

Reproductive Health Matters, 2000

Biotechnology and Applied Biochemistry, 2020

This paper focuses on the ethical and regulatory issues raised by gene editing. In the introducti... more This paper focuses on the ethical and regulatory issues raised by gene editing. In the introduction of this paper, authors provide the background where the ethical and regulatory issues by gene editing have been raised including the scientific dimension of gene‐editing techniques. In the second part of the paper, the authors focus on ethical issues in human gene editing with the start of Huang Junjiu case and He Jiankui case. Here, the authors discuss the criteria for evaluating action, general ethical issues in gene editing, and try to answer two crucial questions: is it ethically justifiable to use human embryo in ex vivo genome editing study and is it ethically justifiable to perform heritable human genome editing? In answering the second question, the authors discuss the arguments against and for heritable human genome editing, methodological problem, and the building of an ethical framework for heritable human genome editing. In the third part of the paper, the authors focus on regulatory issues in gene editing including proactionary approach versus ethically thinking ahead approach, self‐regulation versus top‐down regulation, transparency versus confidentiality, and education versus punishment.

L’article commence par l’histoire et le statu quo de la securite sociale en Chine continentale, p... more L’article commence par l’histoire et le statu quo de la securite sociale en Chine continentale, puis examine les valeurs et les principes qui sous-tendent la conception et la mise en œuvre du systeme de securite sociale, les defis auxquels le systeme de securite sociale est confronte, l’egalitarisme et la securite sociale.

East Asian Journal of Philosophy, 2020

The CRISPR Journal, 2020

In September 2020, a detailed report on Heritable Human Genome Editing was published. The report ... more In September 2020, a detailed report on Heritable Human Genome Editing was published. The report offers a translational pathway for the limited approval of germline editing under certain circumstances and assuming various criteria have been met. In this perspective, three dozen experts from the fields of genome editing, medicine, bioethics, law, and related fields offer their candid reactions to the National Academies/Royal Society report, highlighting areas of support, omissions, disagreements, and priorities moving forward.

Hastings Center Report, 2020

Abstract The authors argue that in preventing and controlling the pandemic of Covid‐19, we should... more Abstract The authors argue that in preventing and controlling the pandemic of Covid‐19, we should have taken an offensive or proactive strategy rather than a defensive or reactionary one because the former type of approach can bring about more health benefits and fewer harms than can the latter. The offensive or proactive approach consists of two parts: The first part is to preemptively establish a barrier between a novel virus and humans in order to prevent the spillover of the virus into humans, and the second part is that, when a spillover fails to be prevented, we should take public interventions, such as contact tracing, social distancing, and quarantine and isolation, as early as when there are several dozens or one hundred or more cases that manifest symptoms with an unknown etiology in order to prevent an epidemic that is still limited to relatively small groups from developing into an outbreak.

Nature, 2019

The shocking announcement of genetically modified babies creates an opportunity to overhaul the n... more The shocking announcement of genetically modified babies creates an opportunity to overhaul the nation's science, argue Ruipeng Lei and colleagues. China has hundreds of clinics offering in vitro fertilization, and some practitioners lack awareness of the importance of ethics training.

AME Medical Journal, 2017

Asian Bioethics Review, 2016

This paper provides an ethical analysis of the controversy that arose from the CRISPR/Cas9 gene e... more This paper provides an ethical analysis of the controversy that arose from the CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing research involving human embryos that was conducted by a research team in Guangzhou, China, in 2015. It is argued that the researchers involved did not overstep ethical boundaries. This was confirmed to be the case in an international meeting of experts that was convened following the controversy. It is further argued that the controversy highlights the tension between two fundamentally different policies on developing genome editing technology-one proactionary and the other precautionary. This paper argues for a third approach, based on the policy of "crossing the river by probing stones". Such an approach is consistent with current international recommendations to prioritise basic and pre-clinical research, and to allow the application of genome editing technology to somatic human cells. However, the application of the technology in germline genetic modification for human reproduction or enhancement for medical purposes should not be allowed at present. This is because the attending risks are not well understood and could be excessive or extraordinary, with little or no prospect of benefit. In addition, this paper calls for norms and regulations to be developed for genetically modifying non-human living things.

Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics, 1995

... The Three Mile Islands and Chernobyl accidents revealed the possible catastrophic consequence... more ... The Three Mile Islands and Chernobyl accidents revealed the possible catastrophic consequences of ... but it also threatened ecological systems, including the food chains of fishes, birds and eventually ... sex selection has already jeopardized the balance of the sex ratio in China ...

Structures and Norms in Science, 1997

Nature, 2019

OBITUARY Walter Munk, oceanographer extraordinaire, remembered p.176 GERMLINE EDITING NIH endorse... more OBITUARY Walter Munk, oceanographer extraordinaire, remembered p.176 GERMLINE EDITING NIH endorses moratorium and academies plan next steps p.175 MEDICINE Could artificial intelligence put the care back into health care? p.172 MATERIALS Beyond graphene-three steps to more 2D semiconductors p.169

The Hastings Center Report, 1987

Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 1995

Philosophy and Medicine, 2004

Public Health Genomics, 2000

In view of the fact that for-profit enterprise exceeds public expenditures on genetic research an... more In view of the fact that for-profit enterprise exceeds public expenditures on genetic research and that benefits from the Human Genome Project may accrue only to rich people in rich nations, the HUGO Ethics Committee discussed the necessity of benefit-sharing. Discussions involved case examples ranging from single-gene to multifactorial disorders and included the difficulties of defining community, especially when multifactorial diseases are involved. The Committee discussed arguments for benefit-sharing, including common heritage, the genome as a common resource, and three types of justice: compensatory, procedural, and distributive. The Committee also discussed the importance of community participation in defining benefit, agreed that companies involved in health have special obligations beyond paying taxes, and recommended they devote 1–3% of net profits to healthcare infrastructure or humanitarian efforts.

Comptes Rendus de l'Académie des Sciences - Series III - Sciences de la Vie, 2001

A human being or person cannot be reduced to a set of human genes, or human genome. Genetic essen... more A human being or person cannot be reduced to a set of human genes, or human genome. Genetic essentialism is wrong, because as a person the entity should have self-conscious and social interaction capacity which is grown in an interpersonal relationship. Genetic determinism is wrong too, the relationship between a gene and a trait is not a linear model of causation, but rather a non-linear one. Human genome is a complexity system and functions in a complexity system of human body and a complexity of systems of natural/social environment. Genetic determinism also caused the issue of how much responsibility an agent should take for her/his action, and how much degrees of freedom will a human being have. Human genome research caused several conceptual issues. Can we call a gene 'good' or 'bad', 'superior' of 'inferior'? Is a boy who is detected to have the gene of Huntington's chorea or Alzheimer disease a patient? What should the term 'eugenics' mean? What do the terms such as 'gene therapy', 'treatment' and 'enhancement' and 'human cloning' mean etc.? The research of human genome and its application caused and will cause ethical issues. Can human genome research and its application be used for eugenics, or only for the treatment and prevention of diseases? Must the principle of informed consent/choice be insisted in human genome research and its application? How to protecting gene privacy and combating the discrimination on the basis of genes? How to promote the quality between persons, harmony between ethnic groups and peace between countries? How to establish a fair, just, equal and equitable relationship between developing and developed countries in regarding to human genome research and its application? © 2001 Académie des Sciences/Éditions scientifiques et médicales Elsevier SAS human genome project / genomics / genetic essentialism / genetic determinism / eugenics / informed consent / informed choice / gene privacy / gene discrimination / benefit-sharing

Reproductive Health Matters, 2000

Biotechnology and Applied Biochemistry, 2020

This paper focuses on the ethical and regulatory issues raised by gene editing. In the introducti... more This paper focuses on the ethical and regulatory issues raised by gene editing. In the introduction of this paper, authors provide the background where the ethical and regulatory issues by gene editing have been raised including the scientific dimension of gene‐editing techniques. In the second part of the paper, the authors focus on ethical issues in human gene editing with the start of Huang Junjiu case and He Jiankui case. Here, the authors discuss the criteria for evaluating action, general ethical issues in gene editing, and try to answer two crucial questions: is it ethically justifiable to use human embryo in ex vivo genome editing study and is it ethically justifiable to perform heritable human genome editing? In answering the second question, the authors discuss the arguments against and for heritable human genome editing, methodological problem, and the building of an ethical framework for heritable human genome editing. In the third part of the paper, the authors focus on regulatory issues in gene editing including proactionary approach versus ethically thinking ahead approach, self‐regulation versus top‐down regulation, transparency versus confidentiality, and education versus punishment.

L’article commence par l’histoire et le statu quo de la securite sociale en Chine continentale, p... more L’article commence par l’histoire et le statu quo de la securite sociale en Chine continentale, puis examine les valeurs et les principes qui sous-tendent la conception et la mise en œuvre du systeme de securite sociale, les defis auxquels le systeme de securite sociale est confronte, l’egalitarisme et la securite sociale.

East Asian Journal of Philosophy, 2020

The CRISPR Journal, 2020

In September 2020, a detailed report on Heritable Human Genome Editing was published. The report ... more In September 2020, a detailed report on Heritable Human Genome Editing was published. The report offers a translational pathway for the limited approval of germline editing under certain circumstances and assuming various criteria have been met. In this perspective, three dozen experts from the fields of genome editing, medicine, bioethics, law, and related fields offer their candid reactions to the National Academies/Royal Society report, highlighting areas of support, omissions, disagreements, and priorities moving forward.

Hastings Center Report, 2020

Abstract The authors argue that in preventing and controlling the pandemic of Covid‐19, we should... more Abstract The authors argue that in preventing and controlling the pandemic of Covid‐19, we should have taken an offensive or proactive strategy rather than a defensive or reactionary one because the former type of approach can bring about more health benefits and fewer harms than can the latter. The offensive or proactive approach consists of two parts: The first part is to preemptively establish a barrier between a novel virus and humans in order to prevent the spillover of the virus into humans, and the second part is that, when a spillover fails to be prevented, we should take public interventions, such as contact tracing, social distancing, and quarantine and isolation, as early as when there are several dozens or one hundred or more cases that manifest symptoms with an unknown etiology in order to prevent an epidemic that is still limited to relatively small groups from developing into an outbreak.

Nature, 2019

The shocking announcement of genetically modified babies creates an opportunity to overhaul the n... more The shocking announcement of genetically modified babies creates an opportunity to overhaul the nation's science, argue Ruipeng Lei and colleagues. China has hundreds of clinics offering in vitro fertilization, and some practitioners lack awareness of the importance of ethics training.

AME Medical Journal, 2017

Asian Bioethics Review, 2016

This paper provides an ethical analysis of the controversy that arose from the CRISPR/Cas9 gene e... more This paper provides an ethical analysis of the controversy that arose from the CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing research involving human embryos that was conducted by a research team in Guangzhou, China, in 2015. It is argued that the researchers involved did not overstep ethical boundaries. This was confirmed to be the case in an international meeting of experts that was convened following the controversy. It is further argued that the controversy highlights the tension between two fundamentally different policies on developing genome editing technology-one proactionary and the other precautionary. This paper argues for a third approach, based on the policy of "crossing the river by probing stones". Such an approach is consistent with current international recommendations to prioritise basic and pre-clinical research, and to allow the application of genome editing technology to somatic human cells. However, the application of the technology in germline genetic modification for human reproduction or enhancement for medical purposes should not be allowed at present. This is because the attending risks are not well understood and could be excessive or extraordinary, with little or no prospect of benefit. In addition, this paper calls for norms and regulations to be developed for genetically modifying non-human living things.

Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics, 1995

... The Three Mile Islands and Chernobyl accidents revealed the possible catastrophic consequence... more ... The Three Mile Islands and Chernobyl accidents revealed the possible catastrophic consequences of ... but it also threatened ecological systems, including the food chains of fishes, birds and eventually ... sex selection has already jeopardized the balance of the sex ratio in China ...

Structures and Norms in Science, 1997