The Harvard case of Xu Xiping: exploitation of the people, scientific advance, or genetic theft?

The justification of studies in genetic epidemiology - political scaling in China Medical City

Genetic epidemiology examines the role of genetic factors in determining health and disease in families and in populations to help addressing health problems in a responsible manner. This paper uses a case study of genetic epidemiology in Taizhou, China, to explore ways in which anthropology can contribute to the validation of studies in genetic epidemiology. It does so, first, by identifying potential overgeneralizations of data, often due to mismatching scale and, second, by examining it's embedding in political, historical and local contexts. The example of the longitudinal cohort study in Taizhou illustrates dimensions of such 'political scaling'. Political scaling is a notion used here to refer to the effects of scaling biases in relation to the justification of research in terms of relevance, reach and research ethics. The justification of a project on genetic epidemiology involves presenting a maximum of benefits and a minimum of burden for the population. To facilitate the delineation of political scaling, an analytical distinction between donating and benefiting communities was made using the notions of 'scaling of relevance', 'scaling of reach' and 'scaling of ethics'. Political scaling results at least partly from factors external to research. By situating political scaling in the context of historical, political and local discourses, anthropologists can play a complementary role in genetic epidemiology.

Clarifying the concept of the "Social" in risk assessments for human subjects research

International guidelines for the conduct of research with human participants, such as those put forth by the Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences (CIOMS, 2002), recommend that research review committees account for social risk and benefits to society in their review of proposed research. What do the concepts of the "social" and "society" mean in the context of the review of human participants research? Here we analyze concepts of social and society to define the terms: social harm, social risk, social benefit, and benefits to society. We argue that use of these terms invite more questions than answers and beg for difficult empirical research to determine the nature, likelihood, and magnitude of this category of risk and benefit. Until more research is done and these questions are answered, we advise reviewers to adopt an attitude of provisionalism and caution in their review of specifically "social" risks and benefits and "benefits to society."

China's "Gene War of the Century" and Its Aftermath: The Contest Goes On

Following the successful cloning of genes for mostly rare genetic diseases in the early 1990s, there was a nearly universal enthusiasm that similar approaches could be employed to hunt down genes predisposing people to complex diseases. Around 1996, several well-funded international gene-hunting teams, enticed by the low cost of collecting biological samples and China's enormous population, and ushered in by some well-connected Chinese intermediaries, came to China to hunt down disease susceptibility genes. This alarmed and, in some cases, enraged many poorly funded Chinese scientists, who perceived them as formidable competitors. Some depicted foreign gene-hunters as greedy pilferers of the vast Chinese genetic gold mine, comparing it to the plundering of national treasures from China by invaders in the past, and called upon the government and their fellow countrymen to rise up and protect China's genetic gold mine. Media uproar ensued, proclaiming the imminent "gene war of the century." This article chronicles the key events surrounding this "war" and its aftermath, exposes some inherent complexities in identifying susceptibility genes for complex diseases, highlights some issues obscured or completely overlooked in the passionate and patriotic rhetoric, and debunks some misconceptions embedded in this conflict. In addition, it argues that during the entire course of this "war," the public's interest went conspicuously unmentioned. Finally, it articulates several lessons that can be learned from this conflict, and outlines challenges facing human genetics researchers.

Promoting an Inclusive Approach to Benefit Sharing: Expanding the Scope of the CBD?

The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) is a major international agreement to ensure the conservation of biological diversity, the sustainable use of various components of biological diversity, and fair and equitable access and benefit sharing of advances arising from the use of related genetic resources. The CBD excludes human genetic resources. In light of the rapid advances in biotechnology, genetic resources are increasingly being utilised by different types of users and in different industries. This usage is not confined to plants, animals or micro-organisms but includes human genetic resources and sometimes a mix of such resources. In the absence of any international agreement, various national governments are framing their own rules and guidelines. This patchwork of regulation may eventually impede global research efforts. This chapter argues that the CBD is qualified to be the central agency at the global level for the advance of broader benefit sharing frameworks. By implication, the scope of the CBD should be expanded to include human genetic resources.

Perspective: global medicine: opportunities and challenges for academic health science systems

Globalization is having a growing impact on health and health care, presenting challenges as well as opportunities for the U.S. health care industry in general and for academic health science systems (AHSSs) in particular. The authors believe that AHSSs must develop long-term strategies that address their future role in global medicine. AHSSs should meet global challenges through planning, engagement, and innovation that combine traditional academic activities with entrepreneurial approaches to health care delivery, research, and education, including international public-private partnerships. The opportunities for U.S.-based AHSSs to be global health care leaders and establish partnerships that improve health locally and globally more than offset the potential financial, organizational, politico-legal, and reputational risks that exist in the global health care arena. By examining recent international activities of leading AHSSs, the authors review the risks and the critical factors for success and discuss external policy shifts in workforce development and accreditation that would further support the growth of global medicine.

Stewardship of human biospecimens, DNA, genotype, and clinical data in the GWAS era

An ethical quandary is emerging over custodianship of and access to DNA specimens and attached data, clinical and genetic, held in large disease cohort collections. The balance of patients' rights and science/society's quest for broad open access must be resolved in order to realize the promise of gene association studies of complex human disease. A way forward may be to convene a colloquium of international medical and science organizations charged with developing global consensus guidance and ethical principles for access to and use of genomic biobanks.

CQ Sources/Bibliography

These CQ Sources were compiled by Bette Anton.