1
|
Jeziorski J, Brandt R, Evans JH, Campana W, Kalichman M, Thompson E, Goldstein L, Koch C, Muotri AR. Brain organoids, consciousness, ethics and moral status. Semin Cell Dev Biol 2023; 144:97-102. [PMID: 35339359 DOI: 10.1016/j.semcdb.2022.03.020] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/04/2022] [Revised: 03/14/2022] [Accepted: 03/14/2022] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
Advances in the field of human stem cells are often a source of public and ethical controversy. Researchers must frequently balance diverse societal perspectives on questions of morality with the pursuit of medical therapeutics and innovation. Recent developments in brain organoids make this challenge even more acute. Brain organoids are a new class of brain surrogate generated from human pluripotent stem cells (hPSCs). They have gained traction as a model for studying the intricacies of the human brain by using advancements in stem cell biology to recapitulate aspects of the developing human brain in vitro. However, recent observation of neural oscillations spontaneously emerging from these organoids raises the question of whether brain organoids are or could become conscious. At the same time, brain organoids offer a potentially unique opportunity to scientifically understand consciousness. To address these issues, experimental biologists, philosophers, and ethicists united to discuss the possibility of consciousness in human brain organoids and the consequent ethical and moral implications.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jacob Jeziorski
- Departments of Pediatrics and Cellular & Molecular Medicine, University of California San Diego, School of Medicine, Center for Academic Research and Training in Anthropogeny (CARTA), Kavli Institute for Brain and Mind, Archealization Center (ArchC), La Jolla, CA 92037, USA
| | - Reuven Brandt
- Department of Philosophy, University of California, La Jolla, San Diego, CA 92093, USA
| | - John H Evans
- Institute for Practical Ethics, University of California, La Jolla, San Diego, CA 92093, USA
| | - Wendy Campana
- Department of Anesthesiology, University of California, La Jolla, San Diego, CA 92093, USA
| | - Michael Kalichman
- Research Ethics Program, University of California, La Jolla, San Diego, CA 92093, USA
| | - Evan Thompson
- Department of Philosophy, University of British Columbia, Canada
| | - Lawrence Goldstein
- Departments of Medicine and Cellular & Molecular Medicine, University of California, La Jolla, San Diego, CA 92037, USA
| | | | - Alysson R Muotri
- Departments of Pediatrics and Cellular & Molecular Medicine, University of California San Diego, School of Medicine, Center for Academic Research and Training in Anthropogeny (CARTA), Kavli Institute for Brain and Mind, Archealization Center (ArchC), La Jolla, CA 92037, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Brown JL, Voth JP, Person K, Low WC. A Technological and Regulatory Review on Human-Animal Chimera Research: The Current Landscape of Biology, Law, and Public Opinion. Cell Transplant 2023; 32:9636897231183112. [PMID: 37599386 PMCID: PMC10467371 DOI: 10.1177/09636897231183112] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/06/2022] [Revised: 05/20/2023] [Accepted: 06/04/2023] [Indexed: 08/22/2023] Open
Abstract
Organ transplantation is a highly utilized treatment for many medical conditions, yet the number of patients waiting for organs far exceeds the number available. The challenges and limitations currently associated with organ transplantation and technological advances in gene editing techniques have led scientists to pursue alternate solutions to the donor organ shortage. Growing human organs in animals and harvesting those organs for transplantation into humans is one such solution. These chimeric animals usually have certain genes necessary for a specific organ's development inhibited at an early developmental stage, followed by the addition of cultured pluripotent human cells to fill that developmental niche. The result is a chimeric animal that contains human organs which are available for transplant into a patient, circumventing some of the limitations currently involved in donor organ transplantation. In this review, we will discuss both the current scientific and legal landscape of human-animal chimera (HAC) research. We present an overview of the technological advances that allow for the creation of HACs, the patents that currently exist on these methods, as well as current public attitude and understanding that can influence HAC research policy. We complement our scientific and public attitude discussion with a regulatory overview of chimera research at both the national and state level, while also contrasting current U.S. legislation with regulations in other countries. Overall, we provide a comprehensive analysis of the legal and scientific barriers to conducting research on HACs for the generation of transplantable human organs, as well as provide recommendations for the future.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jennifer L. Brown
- Graduate Program in Neuroscience, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA
- Department of Neuroscience, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA
- Institute for Translational Neuroscience, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA
- Law School, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA
| | - Joseph P. Voth
- Department of Neuroscience, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
- Medical Scientist Training Program, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Kennedy Person
- Graduate Program in Neuroscience, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA
- Department of Neurosurgery, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA
- Stem Cell Institute, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA
| | - Walter C. Low
- Graduate Program in Neuroscience, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA
- Department of Neurosurgery, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA
- Stem Cell Institute, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Sawai T, Hayashi Y, Niikawa T, Shepherd J, Thomas E, Lee TL, Erler A, Watanabe M, Sakaguchi H. Mapping the Ethical Issues of Brain Organoid Research and Application. AJOB Neurosci 2021; 13:81-94. [PMID: 33769221 DOI: 10.1080/21507740.2021.1896603] [Citation(s) in RCA: 36] [Impact Index Per Article: 12.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/30/2022]
Abstract
In 2008, researchers created human three-dimensional neural tissue - known as the pioneering work of "brain organoids." In recent years, some researchers have transplanted human brain organoids into animal brains for applicational purposes. With these experiments have come many ethical concerns. It is thus an urgent task to clarify what is ethically permissible and impermissible in brain organoid research. This paper seeks (1) to sort out the ethical issues related to brain organoid research and application and (2) to propose future directions for additional ethical consideration and policy debates in the field. Toward (1), this paper first outlines the current state of brain organoid research, and then briefly responds to previously raised related ethical concerns. Looking next at anticipated scientific developments in brain organoid research, we will discuss (i) ethical issues related to in vitro brain organoids, (ii) ethical issues raised when brain organoids form complexes or have relationships with other entities, and (iii) ethical issues of research ethics and governance. Finally, in pursuit of (2), we propose research policies that are mindful of the ethics of brain organoid research and application and also suggest the need for an international framework for research and application of brain organoids.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tsutomu Sawai
- Institute for the Advanced Study of Human Biology (WPI-ASHBi), KUIAS Kyoto University.,Center for iPS Cell Research and Application, Kyoto University
| | | | | | | | | | - Tsung-Ling Lee
- Institute of Health and Biotechnology of Law, Taipei Medical University
| | | | - Momoko Watanabe
- University of California Irvine, School of Medicine.,Sue & Bill Gross Stem Cell Research Center
| | - Hideya Sakaguchi
- RIKEN Center for Biosystems Dynamics Research, BDR-Otsuka Pharmaceutical Collaboration Center
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Kwisda K, White L, Hübner D. Ethical arguments concerning human-animal chimera research: a systematic review. BMC Med Ethics 2020; 21:24. [PMID: 32293411 PMCID: PMC7092670 DOI: 10.1186/s12910-020-00465-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/17/2019] [Accepted: 03/06/2020] [Indexed: 12/31/2022] Open
Abstract
Background The burgeoning field of biomedical research involving the mixture of human and animal materials has attracted significant ethical controversy. Due to the many dimensions of potential ethical conflict involved in this type of research, and the wide variety of research projects under discussion, it is difficult to obtain an overview of the ethical debate. This paper attempts to remedy this by providing a systematic review of ethical reasons in academic publications on human-animal chimera research. Methods We conducted a systematic review of the ethical literature concerning human-animal chimeras based on the research question: “What ethical reasons have been given for or against conducting human-animal chimera research, and how have these reasons been treated in the ongoing debate?” Our search extends until the end of the year 2017, including MEDLINE, Embase, PhilPapers and EthxWeb databases, restricted to peer-reviewed journal publications in English. Papers containing ethical reasons were analyzed, and the reasons were coded according to whether they were endorsed, mentioned or rejected. Results Four hundred thirty-one articles were retrieved by our search, and 88 were ultimately included and analyzed. Within these articles, we found 464 passages containing reasons for and against conducting human-animal chimera research. We classified these reasons into five categories and, within these, identified 12 broad and 31 narrow reason types. 15% of the retrieved passages contained reasons in favor of conducting chimera research (Category P), while 85% of the passages contained reasons against it. The reasons against conducting chimera research fell into four further categories: reasons concerning the creation of a chimera (Category A), its treatment (Category B), reasons referring to metaphysical or social issues resulting from its existence (Category C) and to potential downstream effects of chimera research (Category D). A significant proportion of identified passages (46%) fell under Category C. Conclusions We hope that our results, in revealing the conceptual and argumentative structure of the debate and highlighting some its most notable tendencies and prominent positions, will facilitate continued discussion and provide a basis for the development of relevant policy and legislation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Koko Kwisda
- CELLS - Centre for Ethics and Law in the Life Sciences, Leibniz University Hannover, Otto-Brenner-Strasse 1, 30159, Hannover, Germany.
| | - Lucie White
- Institute of Philosophy, Leibniz University Hannover, Im Moore 21, 30167, Hannover, Germany
| | - Dietmar Hübner
- Institute of Philosophy, Leibniz University Hannover, Im Moore 21, 30167, Hannover, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Streiffer R. Harming animals for research and for food in conditions of moral uncertainty. JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ETHICS 2019; 45:453-454. [PMID: 31189725 DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2019-105581] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/15/2019] [Accepted: 05/16/2019] [Indexed: 06/09/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Robert Streiffer
- Medical History and Bioethics, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Porsdam Mann S, Sun R, Hermerén G. A framework for the ethical assessment of chimeric animal research involving human neural tissue. BMC Med Ethics 2019; 20:10. [PMID: 30683100 PMCID: PMC6347750 DOI: 10.1186/s12910-019-0345-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/12/2017] [Accepted: 01/10/2019] [Indexed: 01/12/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Animal models of human diseases are often used in biomedical research in place of human subjects. However, results obtained by animal models may fail to hold true for humans. One way of addressing this problem is to make animal models more similar to humans by placing human tissue into animal models, rendering them chimeric. Since technical and ethical limitations make neurological disorders difficult to study in humans, chimeric models with human neural tissue could help advance our understanding of neuropathophysiology. MAIN BODY In this article, we examine whether the introduction of human neural tissue and any consequent cognitive change is relevant to the way we ought to treat chimeras. We argue that changes in cognitive abilities are morally relevant to the extent that they increase the capacities that affect the moral status of any entity, including awareness, autonomy, and sociability. We posit that no being, regardless of species, should be treated in a way that is incommensurate with its moral status. Finally, we propose a framework that can be used to guide ethical assessment of research involving chimeras with advanced cognitive capacities. CONCLUSION We advance this framework as a useful tool for bringing relevant considerations to the forefront for those considering the ethical merit of proposed chimeric research. In doing so, we examine concepts relevant to the question of how any entity may be treated, including moral status, dignity, and capacities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sebastian Porsdam Mann
- Uehiro Center for Practical Ethics, University of Oxford, Oxford, OX1 1PT UK
- Department of Media, Cognition and Communication, University of Copenhagen, DK-2300 Copenhagen S, Denmark
| | - Rosa Sun
- University Hospital of Coventry Clifford Bridge Rd, Coventry, CV2 2DX UK
| | - Göran Hermerén
- Department of Medicine, Lund University, Sölvegatan 19, 22100 Lund, Sweden
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Levine S, Grabel L. The contribution of human/non-human animal chimeras to stem cell research. Stem Cell Res 2017; 24:128-134. [PMID: 28941410 DOI: 10.1016/j.scr.2017.09.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/05/2017] [Revised: 08/21/2017] [Accepted: 09/13/2017] [Indexed: 01/18/2023] Open
Abstract
Chimeric animals are made up of cells from two separate zygotes. Human/non-human animal chimeras have been used for a number of research purposes, including human disease modeling. Pluripotent stem cell (PSC) research has relied upon the chimera approach to examine the developmental potential of stem cells, to determine the efficacy of cell replacement therapies, and to establish a means of producing human organs. Based on ethical issues, this work has faced pushback from various sources including funding agencies. We discuss here the essential role these studies have played, from gaining a better understanding of human biology to providing a stepping stone to human disease treatments. We also consider the major ethical issues, as well as the current status of support for this work in the United States.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sonya Levine
- Department of Biology and College of the Environment, Wesleyan University, 52 Lawn Avenue, Middletown, CT 06459-0170, United States.
| | - Laura Grabel
- Department of Biology and College of the Environment, Wesleyan University, 52 Lawn Avenue, Middletown, CT 06459-0170, United States.
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Abstract
Chimeras are widely acknowledged as the gold standard for assessing stem cell pluripotency, based on their capacity to test donor cell lineage potential in the context of an organized, normally developing tissue. Experimental chimeras provide key insights into mammalian developmental mechanisms and offer a resource for interrogating the fate potential of various pluripotent stem cell states. We highlight the applications and current limitations presented by intra- and inter-species chimeras and consider their future contribution to the stem cell field. Despite the technical and ethical demands of experimental chimeras, including human-interspecies chimeras, they are a provocative resource for achieving regenerative medicine goals.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Victoria L Mascetti
- British Heart Foundation Oxbridge Centre for Regenerative Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB2 0SZ, UK; Wellcome Trust-Medical Research Council Cambridge Stem Cell Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB2 0SZ, UK.
| | - Roger A Pedersen
- Wellcome Trust-Medical Research Council Cambridge Stem Cell Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB2 0SZ, UK; Department of Paediatrics, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB2 0SZ, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Palacios-González C. Ethical aspects of creating human-nonhuman chimeras capable of human gamete production and human pregnancy. Monash Bioeth Rev 2016; 33:181-202. [PMID: 26458367 PMCID: PMC4631712 DOI: 10.1007/s40592-015-0031-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/08/2023]
Abstract
In this paper I explore some of the moral issues that could emerge from the creation of human-nonhuman chimeras (HNH-chimeras) capable of human gamete production and human pregnancy. First I explore whether there is a cogent argument against the creation of HNH-chimeras that could produce human gametes. I conclude that so far there is none, and that in fact there is at least one good moral reason for producing such types of creatures. Afterwards I explore some of the moral problems that could emerge from the fact that a HNH-chimera could become pregnant with a human conceptus. I focus on two sets of problems: problems that would arise by virtue of the fact that a human is gestated by a nonhuman creature, and problems that would emerge from the fact that such pregnancies could affect the health of the HNH-chimera.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- César Palacios-González
- Institute for Science Ethics and Innovation, The University of Manchester, Room 3.383, Stopford Building, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Cabrera Trujillo LY, Engel-Glatter S. Human-animal chimera: a neuro driven discussion? Comparison of three leading European research countries. SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING ETHICS 2015; 21:595-617. [PMID: 24891129 DOI: 10.1007/s11948-014-9556-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/28/2014] [Accepted: 05/22/2014] [Indexed: 05/09/2023]
Abstract
Research with human-animal chimera raises a number of ethical concerns, especially when neural stem cells are transplanted into the brains of non-human primates (NHPs). Besides animal welfare concerns and ethical issues associated with the use of embryonic stem cells, the research is also regarded as controversial from the standpoint of NHPs developing cognitive or behavioural capabilities that are regarded as "unique" to humans. However, scientists are urging to test new therapeutic approaches for neurological diseases in primate models as they better mimic human physiology than all current animal models. As a response, various countries have issued reports on the topic. Our paper summarizes the ethical issues raised by research with human-animal brain chimeras and compares the relevant regulatory instruments and different recommendations issued in national reports from three important European research nations: Germany, Switzerland and the United Kingdom. We assess and discuss the focus and priorities set by the different reports, review various reasons for and perspectives on the importance of the brain in chimera research, and identify critical points in the reports that warrant further specification and debate.
Collapse
|
11
|
Abstract
The development of human pluripotent stem cells has opened up the possibility to analyse the function of human cells and tissues in animal hosts, thus generating chimeras. Although such lines of research have great potential for both basic and translational science, they also raise unique ethical issues that must be considered.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Göran Hermerén
- Department of Medical Ethics, Biomedical Centre, Lund University, Lund SE22184, Sweden
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Haber MH, Benham B. Reframing the ethical issues in part-human animal research: the unbearable ontology of inexorable moral confusion. THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF BIOETHICS : AJOB 2012; 12:17-25. [PMID: 22881848 DOI: 10.1080/15265161.2012.699139] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/01/2023]
Abstract
Research that involves the creation of animals with human-derived parts opens the door to potentially valuable scientific and therapeutic advances, yet invokes unsettling moral questions. Critics and champions alike stand to gain from clear identification and careful consideration of the strongest ethical objections to this research. A prevailing objection argues that crossing the human/nonhuman species boundary introduces inexorable moral confusion (IMC) that warrants a restriction to this research on precautionary grounds. Though this objection may capture the intuitions of many who find this research unsettling, it relies on mistaken views of both biology and moral standing, ultimately distorting the morally relevant facts. We critically examine IMC, identify mistaken essentialist assumptions, and reframe ethical concerns. The upshot is a stronger line of objection that encourages a more inclusive and productive ethical discourse.
Collapse
|
13
|
Krahn TM, Wallwork TE. Who Cares about Consent Requirements for Sourcing Human Embryonic Stem Cells? Are Errors In the Past Really Errors Of the Past? Account Res 2011; 18:250-88. [DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2011.584763] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/18/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Timothy M. Krahn
- a Novel Tech Ethics, Faculty of Medicine, Dalhousie University , Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
| | - Thomas E. Wallwork
- a Novel Tech Ethics, Faculty of Medicine, Dalhousie University , Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Robertson JA. Law, science, and innovation: introduction to the symposium. THE JOURNAL OF LAW, MEDICINE & ETHICS : A JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF LAW, MEDICINE & ETHICS 2010; 38:175-190. [PMID: 20579241 DOI: 10.1111/j.1748-720x.2010.00478.x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/29/2023]
|