When Genetics Meets Religion: What Scientists and Religious Leaders Can Learn from Each Other

Perceptions and beliefs of community gatekeepers about genomic risk information in African cleft research

BACKGROUND

A fundamental ethical issue in African genomics research is how socio-cultural factors impact perspectives, acceptance, and utility of genomic information, especially in stigmatizing conditions like orofacial clefts (OFCs). Previous research has shown that gatekeepers (e.g., religious, political, family or community leaders) wield considerable influence on the decision-making capabilities of their members, including health issues. Thus, their perspectives can inform the design of engagement strategies and increase exposure to the benefits of genomics testing/research. This is especially important for Africans underrepresented in genomic research. Our study aims to investigate the perspectives of gatekeepers concerning genomic risk information (GRI) in the presence of OFCs in a sub-Saharan African cohort.

METHODS

Twenty-five focus group discussions (FGDs) consisting of 214 gatekeepers (religious, community, ethnic leaders, and traditional birth attendants) in Lagos, Nigeria, explored the opinions of participants on genomic risk information (GRI), OFC experience, and the possibility of involvement in collaborative decision-making in Lagos, Nigeria. Transcripts generated from audio recordings were coded and analyzed in NVivo using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Three main themes-knowledge, beliefs, and willingness to act-emerged from exploring the perspective of gatekeepers about GRI in this group. We observed mixed opinions regarding the acceptance of GRI. Many participants believed their role is to guide and support members when they receive results; this is based on the level of trust their members have in them. However, participants felt they would need to be trained by medical experts to do this. Also, religious and cultural beliefs were crucial to determining participants' understanding of OFCs and the acceptance and utilization of GRI.

CONCLUSIONS

Incorporating cultural sensitivity into public engagement could help develop appropriate strategies to manage conflicting ideologies surrounding genomic information in African communities. This will allow for more widespread access to the advances in genomics research in underrepresented populations. We also recommend a synergistic relationship between community health specialists/scientists, and community leaders, including spiritual providers to better understand and utilize GRI.

Stakeholder Involvement in the Governance of Human Genome Editing in Japan

Genome editing is a technology that can accurately and efficiently modify the genome of organisms, including the human genome. Although human genome editing (HGE) has many benefits, it also involves technical risks and ethical, legal, and social issues. Thus, the pros and cons of using this technology have been actively debated since 2015. Notably, the research community has taken an interest in the issue and has discussed it internationally. However, for the governance of HGE, the roles of government agencies and the general public are also important for an effective regulatory system. Here, we examine the roles of the research community, government, and public in the governance of HGE through an analysis of discussions in the Japanese Expert Panel on Bioethics. During the discussion of the research ethics review system, the professionalism of the research community and the pros and cons of state oversight have become issues for debate. Furthermore, through an examination of the overall policy-making process, three stakeholders are clearly involved in the governance of emerging medical technologies in the Expert Panel on Bioethics, a discussion forum established by government agencies. The contrast among these roles provides insight into the positive roles of government agencies and the research community and the conditions under which these roles are played. We also note that there are diverse actors in the public, which may have an impact on their participation. Our results may serve as a guide for countries and organizations to establish governance on emerging medical technologies.

Playing God? Religious Perspectives on Manipulating the Genome

The Human Genome Project (HGP) is a remarkable medical science breakthrough that enables the understanding of genetics and the intervention of human health. An individual's health is influenced by physical, emotional, social, intellectual, and religious factors. Among these, religious beliefs shape our thinking on cloning, stem cells, and gene editing, affecting healthcare decisions and the motivation for seeking treatment. Is the human genome sacred? Does editing it violate the idea that we're made in God's image or allow us to "play God"? Understanding the perspectives behind the fundamental religious doctrines of Islam, Christian, Hindu, and Buddhist on gene editing/therapy in somatic and germline cells would ensure a right balance between geneticists and theologians in providing the best healthcare while catering to individual beliefs.

The Evolving Landscape of Global Surgery: A Qualitative Study of North American Surgeons' Perspectives on Faith-Based and Academic Initiatives

Faith-based missions have played a large role in surgical care delivery in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). As global surgery is now an academic discipline, this pilot study sought to understand how different faith ideologies influence surgeon motivations and subsequent culture of the global surgery landscape. Interviews were conducted with North American surgeons who pursue global surgery significantly in their career. Points of discussion included early influences, obstacles, motivations, philosophy and approach to global surgery work, and experiences with faith-based (FBO) and non-faith-based organizations (NFBO). Notes were transcribed and thematic analysis performed. Sixteen surgeons were interviewed (11 men, 5 women, ages 39-75 years-old). Surgeons had worked in 32 countries with FBO and NFBO in intermittent or long-term capacity. Religious upbringing and current affiliations included Atheism, Protestant Christianity, Catholicism, Hinduism, Judaism, Mormonism, Islam, and nonreligious spirituality. Early influences included international upbringing (n = 7), emphasis on service (n = 9), and exposure to the religious mission concept (n = 6). The most common core motivation among all participants was addressing disparities (n = 10). Some believed that FBO and NFBO have different goals (n = 4), and only surgeons identifying with Christianity believed the goals are similar (n = 3). Participants expressed that FBO are exclusive (n = 4) and focused on proselytization (n = 6) while NFBO are humanitarian (n = 3) but less integrated into the community (n = 4). Global surgeons have shared early influences, obstacles, and desire to address disparities. Perceptions of FBO and NFBO differed based on religious background. This pilot study will inform future studies regarding the collaborations of FBO and NFBO to improve global surgical care.