Evidence map›Paper›PMID 11315420›Full record

ReviewMedicine, health care, and philosophy2001

Can it be a "sin" to understand disease? On "genes" and "eugenics" and an "unconnected connection".

E M Neumann-Held

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Medicine, health care, and philosophy, 2001. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. What is a genetic cause? The example of Alzheimer's Disease.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2006
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

E M Neumann-HeldEuropäische Akademie zur Erforschung von Folgen wissenschaftlich-technischer Entwicklungen GmbH, Wilhelmstr. 56, D-53474 Bad Neuenahr-Ahrweiler, Germany. eva.neumann-held@dlr.de

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Particularly, but not exclusively, in Germany, concerns are uttered as to the consequences of modern biotechnological advances and their range of applications in the field of human genetics. Whereas the proponents of this research are mainly focussing on the possible knowledge that could be gained by understanding the causes of developmental processes and of disease on the molecular level, the critics fear the beginnings of a new eugenics movement. Without claiming a logical relationship between genetic sciences and eugenics movements, it is nevertheless suggested in this article that a connection between both can become established when the distinction between scientifically validated statements on one hand and guiding hypotheses and assumptions on the other hand is blurred, as is observed particularly when scientists report their results to the public. This claim is demonstrated in comparisons between the current state of scientific knowledge on the role of genes in development and causation of diseases, and the way this is presented to the public. It is required that a debate on biotechnology should include reflections on the validity of claims made by scientists.

Indexed as

EugenicsGenetics, MedicalEvolution, MolecularGenetic DeterminismGenetic Diseases, InbornGenetic ResearchGermanyHuman Genome ProjectHumansMass MediaResearchSequence Analysis, DNAGenetics and Reproduction

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.