ArticleXenotransplantation
Xenotransplantation in the Age of Genome Editing: Results From the Expert Report for the Federal Ethics Committee on Nonhuman Biotechnology With a Special Focus on Animal Ethics.
Article in Xenotransplantation. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Federal Ethics Committee on Non-Human Biotechnology (ECNH) of Switzerland is an independent expert committee appointed by the Federal Council and mandated to advise the federal authorities from an ethical perspective in the field of nonhuman biotechnology and gene technology. Due to recent developments in the field of xenotransplantation after the introduction of genome editing technologies, the ECNH has commissioned an expert report on the ethical questions of xenotransplantation with a focus on animal ethics. The subject of the inquiry is, in particular, if current developments in the field of xenotransplantation raise new questions regarding ethics in the nonhuman realm or if existing questions have to be re-examined and answered anew.
methodsAn interdisciplinary approach was applied to answer this question. Based on the latest empirical results from medicine and biotechnology, xenotransplantation is analyzed and evaluated with reference to the dignity of the creature (Würde der Kreatur)-which is defined in the Swiss Federal Constitution-and the dignity of animals (Tierwürde) that is stipulated in the Swiss Animal Welfare Act and the Federal Act on Non-Human Gene Technology, as well as contemporary positions in the ethics of the human-animal relationship.
resultsThe report concludes that genome editing for xenotransplantation does not generate any qualitatively new ethical issues concerning ethics in the nonhuman realm. However, contemporary biotechnological developments must be taken as an opportunity to discuss existing ethical issues in an urgent and intensified manner, particularly regarding the significance of animals' moral standing. The lack of consideration of animal-related aspects and the neglect of current developments and the state of the art of animal ethics in the recent discussion about xenotransplantation is a scientific, ethical, and political issue because animals are most negatively affected by xenotransplantation. This is especially relevant because the contemporary state of the art in animal ethics tends to consider and protect animals more strongly than in the past.
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.