ReviewMonash bioethics review2016
Mitochondrial replacement techniques: egg donation, genealogy and eugenics.
Review in Monash bioethics review, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- 'Recombining' biological motherhoods. Towards two 'complete' biological mothers.Journal of medical ethics · 2025Article
- Review
- Tri-parent Baby Technology and Preservation of Lineage: An Analysis from the Perspective of Maqasid al-Shari'ah Based Islamic Bioethics.Science and engineering ethics · 2019Article
- Lesbian motherhood and mitochondrial replacement techniques: reproductive freedom and genetic kinship.Journal of medical ethics · 2018Article
- Mitochondrial manipulation in fertility clinics: Regulation and responsibility.Reproductive biomedicine & society online · 2018Article
- Mitochondrial Replacement Techniques: Genetic Relatedness, Gender Implications, and Justice.Gender and the genome · 2017Article
- Are there moral differences between maternal spindle transfer and pronuclear transfer?Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2017Article
- Assisted reproductive technologies to prevent human mitochondrial disease transmission.Nature biotechnology · 2017Article
- A 14-day limit for bioethics: the debate over human embryo research.BMC medical ethics · 2017Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
Several objections against the morality of researching or employing mitochondrial replacement techniques have been advanced recently. In this paper, I examine three of these objections and show that they are found wanting. First I examine whether mitochondrial replacement techniques, research and clinical practice, should not be carried out because of possible harms to egg donors. Next I assess whether mitochondrial replacement techniques should be banned because they could affect the study of genealogical ancestry. Finally, I examine the claim that mitochondrial replacement techniques are not transferring mitochondrial DNA but nuclear DNA, and that this should be prohibited on ethical grounds.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.