Freitas on Disease in Nanomedicine: Implications for Ethics
- 107 Downloads
This paper critically examines the volitional normative model of disease and its underlying nanotechnologic vision of medicine both defended by Robert Freitas. Having provided an account of this vision, we explicate the highlight of the model, which is a concept of disease based on individual values and preferences. The model’s normative positions are then critiqued based on our argument that the epistemic basis of Freitas’s vision of nanotechnologic medicine and, by extension, of his volitional normative model of disease is scientifically flawed. An ethical and social critique of the model is then conducted on the basis of the model’s implicit ethical underpinnings. We argue that Freitas fails to justify the normativity of his model by not addressing the ethical issues that permeate it, one of which is the question of responsibility regarding the development of medical nanotechnology and the practice of new forms of medicine such as the one he envisions. We conclude that, due to its radically individualistic position, the model implies an unjustified view of nanoethics and relegates this field of ethics to the periphery of discussions of nanomedicine.
KeywordsChromosome replacement therapy Freitas Molecular reference structures Molecular technologic medicine Nanoethics Nanomedicine Nanotechnologic medicine Nanotechnology Volitional normative model of disease
This research was supported, in part, by a National Science Foundation Sub-Grant from the Center of Nanoengineering of Polymeric Biomedical Devices at Ohio State University.
The authors wish to thank Neocles Leontis for his feedback on their biological account of gene expression/protein synthesis and two anonymous reviewers of the journal for their encouragement and valuable criticism.
- 1.Abplanalp J (1983) Premenstrual syndrome: a selective review. In: Golub S (ed) Lifting the curse of menstruation: a feminist appraisal of the influence of menstruation on women’s lives. The Haworth, New York, p 107Google Scholar
- 3.Agich GJ (1997) Toward a pragmatic theory of disease. In: Humber JM, Almeder RF (eds) What is disease? Humana, Totowa, pp 221–246Google Scholar
- 6.Bainbridge WS et al (2006) Ethical considerations in the advance of nanotechnology. In: Foster LE (ed) Nanotechnology: science, innovation and opportunity. Prentice Hall PTR, Upper Saddle River, pp 233–245Google Scholar
- 8.Bayer R (1981) Homosexuality and American psychiatry: the politics of diagnosis. Basic Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- 11.Breggin L, Carothers L (2006) Governing uncertainty: the nanotechnology environmental, health, and safety challenge. Columbia J Environ Law 31:285–329Google Scholar
- 12.Brune H, Ernst H, Grunwald A et al (2006) Nanotechnology: assessment and perspectives (ethics of science and technology assessment). Springer – Verlag, BerlinGoogle Scholar
- 15.Engelhardt HT Jr (1981) The concepts of health and disease. In: Caplan AL, Engelhardt HT Jr, McCartney JJ (eds) Concepts of health and disease: interdisciplinary perspectives. Addison-Wesley, Houston, pp 31–45Google Scholar
- 16.Feynman R (1960) There’s plenty of room at the bottom. Engineering and Science 23:22–36Google Scholar
- 18.Freitas AR Jr (2007) Personal choice in the coming era of nanomedicine. In: Allhoff F, Lin P, Moor J, Weckert J (eds) Nanoethics: the ethical and social implications of nanotechnology. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, pp 161–172Google Scholar
- 22.National Research Council of the National Academies (2009) Committee for review of the federal strategy to address environmental, health, and safety research needs for engineered nanoscale materials. Review of the federal strategy for nanotechnology–related environmental, health, and safety research. The National Academies Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
- 24.Offman A, Kleinplatz PJ. (2004) Does PMDD belong in the DSM? Challenging the medicalization of women’s bodies. The Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality 13(1):17–24Google Scholar
- 25.Richardson JTE (2004) The premenstrual syndrome: a brief history. In: Caplan AL, McCartney JJ, Sisti DA (eds) Health, disease, and illness: concepts in medicine. Georgetown University Press, Washington, DC, pp 176–186Google Scholar
- 27.Roco MC (2005) Converging technologies: nanotechnology and biomedicine. In: Malsch NH (ed) Biomedical nanotechnology. Taylor & Francis, London, pp xi–xixGoogle Scholar
- 28.Roco MC, Bainbridge WS (2003) Converging technologies for improving human performance: nanotechnology, biotechnology, information technology and cognitive science. Kluwer Academic, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
- 29.Sadler JZ (2005) Values and psychiatric diagnosis. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
- 30.Spitzer RL (1981) The diagnostic status of homosexuality in DSM–III: a reformulation of the issues. Am J Psychiatry 138:210–215Google Scholar
- 32.Tucker BP (1998) Deaf culture, cochlear implants, and elective disability. Hastings Cent Rep 28:6–14Google Scholar
- 33.Watson J et al (2008) Molecular biology of the gene, 6th edn. Pearson/Benjamin Cummings, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar