Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Bioethics, population studies, and geneticophobia

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of Community Genetics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In any research of human populations, the classical principles of bioethics (respect for autonomy, non-maleficence, beneficence, proportionality between risks and benefits, and justice) should be strictly followed. The question of individual and/or community rights should also be considered, as well as some neglected rights, such as the right to benefit from progress in science and technology and the right to know the nature of the group’s biological and cultural history; however, in their urge to assure rights, social researchers, bioethics commissions, non-governmental organizations, and community leaders are, in many cases, crossing the limits of good sense. DNA is sometimes interpreted as synonymous to demoniac, and there is a frequent behaviour that I could only describe using a neologism: geneticophobia. There is an irrational attitude against genetic studies aiming to unravel the biological history of a given people and to classify any genome population study as “racist”. This behaviour should be opposed; science and the scientific study of humankind are the only way we have to reach the socially adequate objective of the maximum of happiness to the largest number of persons.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Beauchamp TL, Childress JF (2001) Principles of biomedical ethics, 5th edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown JR (2008) Comparative genomics. Basic and applied research. CRC Press, Boca Raton

    Google Scholar 

  • Choudhury SR, Knapp LA (2006) A review of international and UK-based ethical guidelines for researchers conducting nontherapeutic genetic studies in developing countries. Eur J Hum Genet 14:9–16

    Google Scholar 

  • Darwin C (1859) On the origin of species by means of natural selection, or the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life. John Murray, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Forster MW et al (1998) A model agreement for genetic research in socially identifiable populations. Am J Hum Genet 63:696–702

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fullerton SM, Lee SS-J (2011) Secondary uses and governance of de-identified data: lessons from the human genome diversity panel. BMC Med Ethics 12:16

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hurtado AM, Salzano FM (2004) Introduction. In: Salzano FM, Hurtado AM (eds) Lost paradise and the ethics of research and publication. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 3–23

    Google Scholar 

  • McEwen JE et al (2013) Evolving approaches to the ethical management of genomic data. Trends Genet 29:375–382

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Reardon J, TallBear K (2013) “Your DNA is our history”. Genomics, anthropology, and the construction of whiteness as property. Curr Anthropol 53(Suppl 5):S233–S244

    Google Scholar 

  • Salzano FM (2004) Why studies in tribal populations? In: Salzano FM, Hurtado AM (eds) Lost paradises and the ethics of research and publication. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 70–85

    Google Scholar 

  • Schermer M (2013) Science and pseudoscience. The difference in practice and the practice it makes. In: Pigliucci M, Boudry M (eds) Philosophy of pseudoscience. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 203–233

    Google Scholar 

  • Vitti JJ et al (2012) Human evolutionary genomics: ethical and interpretive issues. Trends Genet 28:137–145

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • WHO (1964) Research in population genetics of primitive groups. World Health Organization, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  • WHO (1968) Research on human population genetics. World Health Organization, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Thanks are due to the persons who always agreed to participate in my research in a friendly way. My studies are financed by Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq, 473118/2012-2) and Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio Grande do Sul, Programa de Apoio a Núcleos de Excelência (FAPERGS/PRONEX, 10/0024-6).

Compliance with ethics guidelines

All my research strictly followed ethical standards, adequately reviewed by institutional and national committees, and in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2000. Informed consent was obtained from all persons included in my studies.

Conflict of interest

Francisco M. Salzano declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Francisco M. Salzano.

Additional information

This article is part of the special issue on “Genetics and Ethics in Latin America”.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Salzano, F.M. Bioethics, population studies, and geneticophobia. J Community Genet 6, 197–200 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12687-014-0211-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12687-014-0211-3

Keywords

Navigation