Advertisement

Emerging Technologies and Health

  • Laura Palazzani
Chapter

Abstract

The exponential growth of emerging technologies opens up new opportunities for knowledge and its application, on human being, forcing us at the same time to rethink some traditional ethical and legal categories, such as freedom, responsibility, conscience, will, intention. The chapter focuses on neuroscience and neurotechnologies, gene-editing and genome-wide tests, the new paradigm of the 4P medicine (prediction, precision, personalization, participation), citizen science, the use of information and communication technologies, big data, mobile-health and biometrics, related to health and healthcare, underlining the main ethical and legal challenges. 

References

  1. Araki, M., & Ishii, T. (2014). International regulatory landscape and integration of corrective genome editing into in vitro fertilization. Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology, 12, 108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Asilomar. (1975). Asilomar Conference on Recombinant DNA.Google Scholar
  3. Baltimore, D., Berg, P., Botchan, M., Carroll, D., Charo, R. A., Church, G., et al. (2015). A prudent path forward for genomic engineering and germline gene modification. Science, 348(6230), 36–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bayer, R., & Galea, S. (2015). Public health in the precision-medicine era. New England Journal of Medicine, 373(6), 499–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bert, F., Giacometti, M., Gualano, M. R., & Siliquini, R. (2014). Smartphones and health promotion: A review of the evidence. Journal of Medical Systems, 38(1), 9995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bird, S. J. (2005). Neuroethics. In C. Mitcham (Ed.), Encyclopedia of science, technology and ethics (Vol. III, p. 1310). New York: Thomson Gale.Google Scholar
  7. Bock, C. (2016). Preserve personal freedom in networked societies. Broad anti-discrimination laws and practices could compensate for failing data protection and technology-linked loss of privacy. Nature, 537(7618), 9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bowker, G. C. (2014). Big Data, Big Questions. The Theory/Data thing. International Journal of Communication, 8, 1795–1799. Los Angeles, USC Annenberg Press.Google Scholar
  9. Buijink, A. W., Visser, B. J., & Marshall, L. (2013). Medical apps for smartphones: Lack of evidence undermines quality and safety. Evidence-Based Medicine, 18(3), 90–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Christenhusz, G. M. (2013). To tell or not to tell? A systematic review of ethical reflections on incidental findings arising in genetics contexts. European Journal of Human Genetics, 21, 248–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Citi GPS Global Perspectives and Solutions. (2016). Technology at work v2.0. The future is not what it used to be, January 2016.Google Scholar
  12. Clarke, T. W. (1999). Fear for mechanism: A compatibilist critique of the “Volition Brain”. Journal of Consciusness Studies, 6, 279–293.Google Scholar
  13. Cohen, G., & Lynch, H. F. (2018). In E. Vayena & U. Gasser (Eds.), Big data, health law, and bioethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Collins, F. S., & Varmus, H. (2015). A new initiative on precision medicine. The New England Journal of Medicine, 372(9), 793–795. p. 26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Commission staff working document. (2013). Use of ‘-omics’ technologies in the development of personalised medicine, Brussels, 25 October 2013 SWD(2013), p. 436.Google Scholar
  16. Committee on Human Gene Editing. (2017). Scientific, medical, and ethical considerations, A Report of the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Medicine, Human Genome Editing: Science, Ethics and Governance (p. 2017). Washington D.C: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  17. Coote, J. H., & Joyner, M. J. (2015). Is precision medicine the route to a healthy world? Lancet, 385, 1617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Damasio, A. R. (2005). Descartes error: Emotion, reason, and the human brain. New York: Avon Books.Google Scholar
  19. Damasio, A. R. (2007). Neuroscience and ethics: Intersections. American Journal of Bioethics, 7, 3–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Davis, A. (1997). The body as password. In “On Newsstands Now”, issue 5.07, July 1997.Google Scholar
  21. De Caro, M., & MacArthur, D. (Eds.). (2004). Naturalism in question. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  22. European Group of Ethics in Science and New Technologies. (2012). Ethics of information and communication technologies.Google Scholar
  23. European Group on Ethics in Science and New Technologies. (2014). Ethics of security and surveillance technologies.Google Scholar
  24. European Group on Ethics in Science and New Technologies. (2015). The Ethical implications of new health tecnologies and citizen participation.Google Scholar
  25. European Group on Ethics in Science and New Technologies (EGE). (1999). Ethical issues of healthcare in the information society.Google Scholar
  26. Farah, M. J. (2002). Emergent ethical issues in neuroscience. Nature Neuroscience, 5, 1123–1129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Farah, M. J. (2007). Social, legal and ethical implications of cognitive neuroscience: “Neuroethics” for short. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 19, 363–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Farah, M. J., & Heberlein, A. S. (2007). Personhood and neuroscience: Naturalizing or nihilating. The American Journal of Bioethics, 71, 37–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Flores, M., Glusman, G., Brogaard, K., Price, N. D., & Hood, L. (2013). P4 medicine: How systems medicine will transform the healthcare sector and society. Personalized Medicine, 10(6), 565–576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Frost, J., Okun, S., Vaughan, T., Heywood, J., & Wicks, P. (2011). Patients-reported outcomes as a sources of evidence in off-label prescribing: Analysis of data from patientslikeme. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 13, e6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Garland, G. (Ed.). (2004). Neuroscience and the law: Brain, mind and the scales of justice. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  32. Gazzaniga, M. (2008). The law and neuroscience. Neuron, 60, 412–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Giacometti, M., Gualano, M. R., Bert, F., & Siliquini, R. (2013). Public health accessible to all: Use of smartphones in the context of healthcare in Italy. Igiene e sanita pubblica, 69(2), 249–259.Google Scholar
  34. Greene, J., & Cohen, J. (2004). For the law, neuroscience changes nothing and everything. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, 359, 1775–1785.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Haffey, F., Brady, R. R., & Maxwell, S. (2013). A comparison of the reliability of smartphone apps for opioid conversion. Drug Safety, 36(2), 111–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Hehir-Kwa, J. K., Claustres, M., Hastings, R., Van Ravenswaaij-arts, C., Christenhusz, G., Genuardi, M., et al. (2015). Meeting report. Towards a European consensus for reporting incidental findings during clinical NGS testing. European Journal of Human Genetics, 23, 1601–1606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Hellenic National Bioethics Commission. (2015). Incidental findings in research and clinical practice.Google Scholar
  38. Hoeren, T. (2014). Big data and the ownership in data: Recent developments in Europe. European Intellectual Property Review, 36(12), 751–754. Sweet & Maxwell, London.Google Scholar
  39. Hood, L., & Flores, M. (2012). A personal view on systems medicine and the emergence of proactive P4 medicine: Predictive, preventive, personalized and participatory. New Biotechnology, 29(6), 613–624.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Illes, J. (Ed.). (2006). Neuroethics: Defining the issues in theory, practice, and policy. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Italian Committee for Bioethics. (1999). Bioethical guidelines for genetic testing.Google Scholar
  42. Italian Committee for Bioethics. (2006). Ethics, health and new information technologies, 2006.Google Scholar
  43. Italian Committee for Bioethics. (2014). Lifestyles and health protection.Google Scholar
  44. Italian Committee for Bioethics. (2015). Mobile health apps: Bioethical aspects.Google Scholar
  45. Italian Committee for Bioethics. (2016). ICT and big data: Bioethical issues.Google Scholar
  46. Italian Committee for Bioethics. (2017a). Ethical issues in gene-editing and CrisprCas9 technique.Google Scholar
  47. Italian Commitee for Bioethics. (2017b). Managing “incidental findings” in genomic investigations in new genomic platforms.Google Scholar
  48. Jain, A. K., Bolle, R., & Pankanti, S. (1998). Biometrics: Personal identification in networked society. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publisher Group.Google Scholar
  49. Jasanoff, S., Huribut, J. B., & Saha, K. (2015). CRISPR democracy: Gene editing and the need for inclusive deliberation. Issues in Science and Technology, 32(1), 37.Google Scholar
  50. Joyner, M. J., & Paneth, M. (2015). Seven questions for personalised medicine. JAMA, 314(10), 999–1000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Kaplan, M., & Roy, I. (2002). Accidental germ-line modification through somatic cell gene therapy. American Journal of Bioethics, 2, 1.Google Scholar
  52. Kaye, J., Curren, L., Anderson, N., Edwards, K., Fullerton, S. M., Kanellopoulou, N., et al. (2012). From patients to partners: Participant-centric initiatives in biomedical research. Nature Reviews Genetics, 13, 371–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Knoppers, B. M. (2014). Introduction from the right to know to the right not to know. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 42, 6–10. Spring 2014, Special Issue: Symposium: The Right Not to Know.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Lanphier, E., Urnov, F., Haecker, S. E., Werner, M., & Smolenski, J. (2015). Do Not Edit the Human Germ Line. Nature, 519(7544), 410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Levy, N. (2007). Neuroethics: Challenges to the 21st century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Libet, B. (1985). Unconscious cerebral initiative and the role of conscious will in voluntary action. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 8, 529–566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Libet, B. (1999). Do we have free will? Journal of Consciousness Studies, 6(8–9), 47–57.Google Scholar
  58. Libet, B., Gleason, C., Wright, E., & Pearl, D. (1983). Time of unconscious intention to act in relation to onset of cerebral activity (readiness-potential). Brain, 106, 623–642.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Mantovani, E., Quinn, P., Guihen, B., Habbig, A., & Hert, P. (2013). eHealth to mHealth – A journey precariously dependent upon apps? European Journal of ePractice, 20, 48–66.Google Scholar
  60. Mayer-Schönberger, V., & Cukier, K. (2013). Big data: A revolution that will transform how we live, work and think. London: John Murray Publisher.Google Scholar
  61. McCartney, M. (2013). How do we know whether medical apps work? British Medical Journal, 346, 181.Google Scholar
  62. MIT Technology Review. (2013). Participants in personal genome project identified by privacy experts, 1st May 2013.Google Scholar
  63. Mittelstadt, B. D., & Floridi, L. (2016). The ethics of big data: Current and foreseeable issues in biomedical contexts. Science and Engineering Ethics, 22, 303–341. Springer, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Mordini, E., & Petrini, C. (2007). Ethical and social implications of biometric identification technologies. Annali Istituto Superiore di Sanità, 43(1), 5–11.Google Scholar
  65. Mueller, M., Tippins, D., & Bryan, L. (2013). The future of citizen science. Democracy and Education, 10, 1.Google Scholar
  66. Müller, K. W., Dreier, M., Beutel, M. E., Duven, E., Giralt, S., & Wölfling, K. (2016). A hidden type of internet addiction? Intense and addictive use of social networking sites in adolescents. Computers in Human Behavior, 55, 172–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. National Research Council. (2011). Toward precision medicine: Building a knowledge network for biomedical research and a new taxonomy of disease. Washington DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  68. Nuffield Council on Bioethics. (2015). The collection, linking and use of data in biomedical research and healthcare: Ethical issues.Google Scholar
  69. Nuffield Council on Bioethics. (2016). Public dialogue on genome editing. Why? When? Who? Report of a Workshop on Public Dialogue for Genome-editing.Google Scholar
  70. Nuffield Council on Bioethics. (2018). Genome editing and human reproduction: Social and ethical issues.Google Scholar
  71. OECD. (2013). Strengthening health information infrastructure for health care quality governance: Good practices, new opportunities and data protection challenges.Google Scholar
  72. OECD. (2017). Recommendation on health data governance.Google Scholar
  73. Parker, M. (2012). Ethical considerations related to mobile technology use in medical research. Journal of Mobile Technology in Medicine, 1(3), 50–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Pockett, S. (2004). Does consciousness cause behaviour? Journal of Consciousness Studies, 11, 23–40.Google Scholar
  75. Prainsack, B. (2014). Understanding participation: The “Citizen Science” of genetics. In B. Prainsack, G. Werner-Felmayer, & G. Schicktanz (Eds.), Genetics as social practice. Farnham: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  76. Prainsack, B. (2018). Personalized medicine. Empowered patients in the 21st century? New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
  77. Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues. (2012). Privacy and progress in whole genome sequencing.Google Scholar
  78. Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues. (2013). Anticipate and communicate: Ethical management of incidental and secondary findings in the clinical, research, and direct-to-consumer contexts.Google Scholar
  79. Raghupathil, W., & Raghupathi, V. (2014). Big data analytics in healthcare: Promise and potential. Health Information Science and Systems, 2, 3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Seife, C. (2013). 23andMe is terrifying, but not for the reasons the FDA thinks. Scientific American. 27 November 2013.Google Scholar
  81. Shringarpure, S. S., & Busamante, C. D. (2015). Privacy risks from genomic data-sharing beacons. American Journal of Human Genetics, 97, 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Siòlberman, M. J., & Clark, L. (2012). M-Health: The Union of technology and healthcare regulations. Phoenix: Greenbranch Publishing.Google Scholar
  83. Spence, S. (1996). Free will in the light of neuropsychiatry. Philosophy, Psychiatry, and Psychology, 3, 75–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Tancredi, L. R. (2005). Hardwired behavior: What neuroscience reveals about morality. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. UNESCO. (2011). Code of conduct for the information society.Google Scholar
  86. UNESCO, International Bioethics Committee. (2015b). Report on updating its reflection on the human genome and human rights.Google Scholar
  87. UNESCO, International Bioethics Committee. (2017). Big data and health.Google Scholar
  88. Van El, G., Cornel, M. C., Borry, P., Hastings, R. J., Fellmann, F., Hodgson, S. V., et al. (2013). Whole-genome sequencing in health care. Recommendations of the European Society of human genetics. European Journal of Human Genetics, 21(Suppl. 1), S1–S5.Google Scholar
  89. Vayena, E., & Tasioulas, J. (2015). “We the Scientists”: A human right to citizen science. Philosophy and Technology, 28, 479–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Vincent, N. O. (2010). On the relevance of neuroscience to criminal responsibility. Criminal Law and Philosophy, 4, 77–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Weber, J. C. (2014). Personalized medicine, promises and expectations, Lettre du CEERE (Centre Européen d’Enseignement et de Recherche de l’Université de Strasbourg), (n. 80), décembre 2014, (pp. 2–3).Google Scholar
  92. WHO. (2012). Legal frameworks for eHealth, based on the findings of the second global survey on eHealth. Global Observatory for eHealth series, 5, 27.Google Scholar
  93. Wolf, J. A., Moreau, J. F., Akilov, O., Patton, T., Inglese, J. C., Ho, J., et al. (2013). Diagnostic inaccuracy of smartphone applications for melanoma detection. JAMA Dermatology, 149(4), 422–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Wolpe, S. (2004). Neuroethics. In S. G. Post (Ed.), Encyclopedia of bioethics (Vol. IV, pp. 1894–1898). New York: Thomson Gale.Google Scholar
  95. Wyber, R., Vaillancourt, S., Perry, W., Mannava, P., Folaranmi, T., & Celi, L. A. (2015). Big data in global health: Improving health in low- and middle-income countries. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 93, 203–208. WHO, Geneva.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG and G. Giappichelli Editore 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Laura Palazzani
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Law, Economics, Politics and Modern LanguagesLUMSA UniversityRomeItaly

Personalised recommendations