Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42113399›Full record

ArticleMedicine, health care, and philosophy2026

Critical bioethics: a new paradigm for the era of techno-feudalism.

Giovanni Rubeis

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medicine, health care, and philosophy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Giovanni RubeisDivision of Health Care Ethics, University of Graz, Heinrichstr. 78, 8010, Graz, Austria. giovanni.rubeis@uni-graz.at.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8265-9436

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The rise of right-wing political movements supported by key players from big tech is transforming Western societies. This so-called techno-feudalism also implies challenges for bioethics. Racist agendas, intentional misinformation on health topics such as vaccinations, banned words and research topics in public institutions, and the massive funding of questionable biomedical research projects undermine health equity, patient safety, and autonomy. This new sociopolitical situation exacerbates a long-standing issue in healthcare that bioethics hitherto mostly failed to address adequately: societal power asymmetries that shape the roles and relationships of actors in healthcare and biomedical research. Although attempts have been made to reflect upon this issue, e.g. in feminist or postcolonial bioethics, there is no coherent bioethical approach that fundamentally focuses on power asymmetries as a lens of bioethical inquiry. In this article, I therefore introduce critical bioethics, an approach that takes epistemic lenses from critical theory, especially the so-called Frankfurt School. These epistemic lenses-totality and embeddedness, instrumental reason, dialectics and emancipation-allow us to uncover the societal causes for ethical issues in healthcare and biomedical research. Based on this methodological foundation, critical bioethics addresses health inequity as a result of power asymmetries by understanding individuals as fundamentally embedded in a concrete socioeconomic context. Through the lens of instrumental reason, it addresses the connection between disruptive technological innovations and economic interests in terms of commodification and solutionism. By using dialectics as a method to uncover contradictions in the way bioethics understands its principles, it provides an emancipatory perspective for normativity that separates it from affirmative forms of bioethical thinking that simply reproduce the suppressive status quo.

Indexed as

Bioethical IssuesBioethicsBiomedical ResearchHumansPoliticsBig techCritical theoryHealth equityPower asymmetriesRacismRight-wing extremism

Identifiers

PMID42113399
PMCPMC13633957

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.