Genomics and genetic medicine: pathways to global health?

Gibbon, Sahra; Kilshaw, Susie; Sleeboom-Faulkner, Margaret

doi:10.1080/13648470.2017.1398816

Cited by 6 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This may result in a divide between the genetic 'haves' and 'have-nots'. Furthermore, on a global level, concerns have previously been raised about the relationship between genetics and genomics and existing global health inequalities (Gibbon, Kilshaw & Sleeboom-Faulkner 2018). This concern about inequality from reproductive technologies, genetic selection and other related technologies such as gene editing have been raised previously in surveys and ethical literature (Gammeltoft and Wahlberg 2014, van Dijke et al 2018, van Dijke et al 2021.…”

Section: Increasing Inequitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing for “Non-Medical” Traits: Ensuring Consistency in Ethical Decision-Making

Bowman‐Smart

Gyngell

Mand

et al. 2021

The American Journal of Bioethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The scope of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) could expand in the future to include detailed analysis of the fetal genome. This will allow for the testing for virtually any trait with a genetic contribution, including 'non-medical' traits. Here we discuss the potential use of NIPT for these traits. We outline a scenario which highlights possible inconsistencies with ethical decision-making. We then discuss the case against permitting these uses. The objections include practical problems; increasing inequities; increasing the burden of choice; negative impacts on the child, family, and society; and issues with implementation. We then outline the case for permitting the use of NIPT for these traits. These include arguments for reproductive liberty and autonomy; questioning the labelling of traits as 'non-medical'; and the principle of procreative beneficence. This summary of the case for and against can serve as a basis for the development of a consistent and coherent ethical framework.

show abstract

Section: Increasing Inequitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing for “Non-Medical” Traits: Ensuring Consistency in Ethical Decision-Making

Bowman‐Smart

Gyngell

Mand

et al. 2021

The American Journal of Bioethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…If diverse aspects of biological, cultural and social globalisation shape how the fluid border spaces of migration are lived, they can also entail the remaking of other, more entrenched boundaries and categories of difference. In their chapter Melania Calestani and Laura Montesi examine how the globalising discourse of genomics (Gibbon et al 2018), and the recent enormous investment in genomic research aimed at elucidating how genetic difference relates to categories of race and ethnicity (Wade et al 2014;Saldaña-Tejeda and Wade 2018), are central to understanding and intervening in health disparities. Providing an important comparative perspective, they examine how discourses about population difference and genetic aetiologies, as this concerns type 2 diabetes in Mexico and chronic kidney disease in the UK, undermine a necessary wider focus on how health inequities are embedded in broader social histories, neoliberal ideologies and 'infrastructures for racialization' (Lee 2005).…”

Section: Globalisation and Contemporary Challenges Of Border Spaces And Biologised Differencementioning

confidence: 99%

Critical Medical Anthropology: Perspectives in and from Latin America

Tym

2021

Journal of Iberian and Latin American Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

is a Wellcome Trust Senior Research Fellow based in the Institute for Global Health at UCL. Jennie has carried out extensive research in Mexico and the UK on reproductive and maternal health and has worked for the past 10 years with indigenous Wixárika communities. She is also co-director of the UCL Centre for Gender and Global Health and teaches and writes about the political economy of gender and health.Sahra Gibbon is associate professor in the Medical Anthropology Department at UCL. She has carried out research in the UK, Cuba and Brazil examining developments in genomics, public health, activism, gender and identity. Her recent publications include (as co-editor) The Routledge Handbook of Genomics, Health and Society (2018) and she is editor, with Jennie Gamlin, of the UCL Press book series Embodying Inequalities.

show abstract

“…Minority populations are often underrepresented in GWASs, potentially skewing the interpretations in ways that can lead to misdiagnosis and perhaps contribute to global health inequities if the research leads to clinically relevant knowledge. Consequently, minority rights and patient groups advocate to have their conditions included in research endeavors (Epstein 2007, Gibbon et al 2018). Yet, including these populations risks racial and ethnic stigmatization if certain groups are associated with genetic risk profiles (Fullwiley 2007, Lewontin 2001).…”

Section: Personalized Medicinementioning

confidence: 99%

Technologies and Health Inequities

Timmermans

Kaufman

2020

Annu. Rev. Sociol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Health technologies aim to improve individual and population health, but they may also exacerbate health disparities. Focusing on the specific design features of technologies, their availability, and their use, we present a conceptual framework to examine how health technologies may benefit some groups more than others by combining the fundamental causes of diseases theory with a technology-in-practice approach. We examine three classes of technologies that have been associated with health inequities: once-advanced technologies such as kidney dialysis and transplantation for end-stage renal disease, which have been plagued by issues of scarcity and fair distribution, generating racial disparities; the highly anticipated precision medicine promising to change the focus from population to individualized medicine; and digital technologies, which may herald a democratization of health care. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Sociology, Volume 46 is July 30, 2020. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.

show abstract

Genomics and genetic medicine: pathways to global health?

Cited by 6 publications

References 41 publications

Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing for “Non-Medical” Traits: Ensuring Consistency in Ethical Decision-Making

Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing for “Non-Medical” Traits: Ensuring Consistency in Ethical Decision-Making

Critical Medical Anthropology: Perspectives in and from Latin America

Technologies and Health Inequities

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About