Australian researcher's perspectives on the Australian industry-led moratorium on genetic tests in life insurance

Fear of insurance discrimination can inhibit genetic research participation. In 2019, an industry-led partial moratorium on using genetic results in Australian life insurance underwriting was introduced. This mixed-methods study used online surveys (n = 59 participants) and semi-structured interviews (n = 22 participants) to capture researchers' perceptions about the moratorium. 66% (n = 39/59) were aware of the moratorium before the survey. Of researchers returning genetic results, 56% (n = 22/39) reported that insurance implications were mentioned in consent forms, but a minority reported updating consent forms post-moratorium (n = 13/39, 33%). Most researchers reported that concerns regarding life insurers utilizing research results inhibited recruitment (35/59, 59%), and few perceived that the moratorium positively influenced participation (n = 9/39, 23%). These findings were supported by qualitative findings which revealed that genetic discrimination concerns were a major issue for some individuals, though these concerns could be eclipsed by the promise of a diagnosis through research participation. The majority thought a regulatory solution should be permanent (n = 34/51, 67%), have financial limits of at least ≥1,000,000 AUD (37/51, 73%), and involve government oversight/legislation (n = 44/51, 86%). In an era where an increasing number of research studies involve genomics as a primary or secondary objective, it is crucial that we have regulatory solutions to address participants' hesitation.

Career Identity Statuses Derived From the Career Identity Development Inventory: A Person-Centered Approach

The Career Identity Development Inventory (CIDI) was designed to be used at the person level to assign individuals in a career identity status that would indicate how they approached a career identity crisis and identify developmental needs to resolve career identity concerns. However, given that CIDI has not been tested using a person-centered approach, the first aim of this study was to demonstrate whether and how CIDI can be used to determine individuals' career identity statuses that are theoretically informed by Marcia's identity status paradigm and neo-Eriksonian identity literature. Using a sample of 410 US college graduates, we identified, through a cluster analytic approach, eight groups of distinct career identity profiles, from which four groups resembled Marcia's identity statuses and four other groups were unique variants of identity statuses that extended this paradigm and illustrated a more gradual process of career identity development. This person-centered approach enabled us to subsequently provide evidence of the criterion validity of CIDI, which was the second aim of this study. We examined how the eight career identity statuses derived from the cluster analysis differed according to validation-criterion variables and found that individuals assigned to statuses characterized by high levels of career identity commitments tended to have better career and psychosocial functioning than individuals assigned to statuses characterized by low levels of career identity commitments. Implications along with directions for future research are discussed with respect to developmental challenges associated with career exploration and critical processes of forming a constructed career identity.

The economic tradeoffs and ecological impacts associated with a potential mesopelagic fishery in the California Current

The ocean's mesopelagic zone (200-1000 m) remains one of the most understudied parts of the ocean despite knowledge that mesopelagic fishes are highly abundant. Apex predators from the surface waters are known to consume these fishes, constituting an important ecological interaction. Some countries have begun exploring the potential harvest of mesopelagic fishes to supply fishmeal and fish oil markets due to the high fish abundance in the mesopelagic zone compared with overfished surface waters. This study explored the economic and ecological implications of a moratorium on the harvest of mesopelagic fishes such as lanternfish off the US West Coast, one of the few areas where such resources are managed. We adapted a bioeconomic decision model to examine the tradeoffs between the values gained from a hypothetical mesopelagic fishery with the potential values lost from declines in predators of mesopelagic fishes facing a reduced prey resource. The economic rationale for a moratorium on harvesting mesopelagics was sensitive both to ecological relationships and the scale of the nonmarket values attributed to noncommercial predators. Using a California Current-based ecological simulation model, we found that most modeled predators of mesopelagic fishes increased in biomass even under high mesopelagic harvest rates, but the changes (either increases or decreases) were small, with relatively few predators responding with more than a 10% change in their biomass. While the ecological simulations implied that a commercial mesopelagic fishery might not have large biomass impacts for many species in the California Current system, there is still a need to further explore the various roles of the mesopelagic zone in the ocean.

Heritable genome editing and cognitive biases: why broad societal consensus is the wrong standard for moving forward

Heritable genome editing (HGE) may one day safely correct mutations that cause serious monogenic diseases. Nevertheless, some scientists and bioethicists argue that HGE should be subject to a moratorium. In their view, no nation should proceed with clinical use absent broad societal consensus in favor of moving forward with HGE and a specific use. This article critiques this plan in light of two cognitive biases. First, human beings favor the status quo. We are primed to favor human reproduction and the human genome in their current forms and resist HGE. Second, human beings also dwell on negative information. Dr He Jiankui's unethical and premature experiment encourages us to judge HGE and its offspring harshly. By reinforcing these biases, the proposed moratorium would make it difficult to achieve broad societal consensus in support of using HGE even to correct dangerous mutations. As an alternative, this article recommends HGE be regulated for safety and efficacy. This approach will keep scientists from using HGE prematurely, while giving society time to discuss this new technology and enact further legislation if necessary.

The Genetic Discrimination Observatory: confronting novel issues in genetic discrimination

Genetic discrimination (GD) is the differential or unfair profiling of an individual on the basis of genetic data. This article summarizes the actions of the Genetic Discrimination Observatory (GDO) in addressing GD and recent developments in GD since late 2020. It shows how GD can take many forms in today's rapidly evolving society.

Health risks from radiofrequency radiation, including 5G, should be assessed by experts with no conflicts of interest

The fifth generation, 5G, of radiofrequency (RF) radiation is about to be implemented globally without investigating the risks to human health and the environment. This has created debate among concerned individuals in numerous countries. In an appeal to the European Union (EU) in September 2017, currently endorsed by >390 scientists and medical doctors, a moratorium on 5G deployment was requested until proper scientific evaluation of potential negative consequences has been conducted. This request has not been acknowledged by the EU. The evaluation of RF radiation health risks from 5G technology is ignored in a report by a government expert group in Switzerland and a recent publication from The International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection. Conflicts of interest and ties to the industry seem to have contributed to the biased reports. The lack of proper unbiased risk evaluation of the 5G technology places populations at risk. Furthermore, there seems to be a cartel of individuals monopolizing evaluation committees, thus reinforcing the no-risk paradigm. We believe that this activity should qualify as scientific misconduct.

Appeals that matter or not on a moratorium on the deployment of the fifth generation, 5G, for microwave radiation

Radiofrequency (RF) radiation in the frequency range of 30 kHz-300 GHz is classified as a 'possible' human carcinogen, Group 2B, by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) since 2011. The evidence has since then been strengthened by further research; thus, RF radiation may now be classified as a human carcinogen, Group 1. In spite of this, microwave radiations are expanding with increasing personal and ambient exposure. One contributing factor is that the majority of countries rely on guidelines formulated by the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP), a private German non-governmental organization. ICNIRP relies on the evaluation only of thermal (heating) effects from RF radiation, thereby excluding a large body of published science demonstrating the detrimental effects caused by non-thermal radiation. The fifth generation, 5G, for microwave radiation is about to be implemented worldwide in spite of no comprehensive investigations of the potential risks to human health and the environment. In an appeal sent to the EU in September, 2017 currently >260 scientists and medical doctors requested for a moratorium on the deployment of 5G until the health risks associated with this new technology have been fully investigated by industry-independent scientists. The appeal and four rebuttals to the EU over a period of >2 years, have not achieved any positive response from the EU to date. Unfortunately, decision makers seem to be uninformed or even misinformed about the risks. EU officials rely on the opinions of individuals within the ICNIRP and the Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks (SCENIHR), most of whom have ties to the industry. They seem to dominate evaluating bodies and refute risks. It is important that these circumstances are described. In this article, the warnings on the health risks associated with RF presented in the 5G appeal and the letters to the EU Health Commissioner since September, 2017 and the authors' rebuttals are summarized. The responses from the EU seem to have thus far prioritized industry profits to the detriment of human health and the environment.

Political economy, stakeholder voices, and saliency: lessons from international policies regulating insurer use of genetic information

A decade ago, Congress passed the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA), with the goals to address fear of genetic discrimination and prevent adverse health insurance and employment decisions on the basis of one's genetic information. Yet, fear of discrimination remains because other insurers, notably life, long-term care, and disability insurers, are not covered by the law. Therefore, there have been persistent murmurings for a 'GINA 2.0' to extend the protections of the original law. Although it is plausible to assume that the insurance industry has the political economy to control future regulation, given the saliency of genetic discrimination, other stakeholders and bureaucrats may have greater influence. This paper explores the history of policy in four countries-the United Kingdom, Sweden, Australia, and Canada. Each country provides examples of continued policy debate and change following an initial period of reliance on insurance industry self-regulation, with change generally occurring over the objection of the insurance industry. This article argues that US insurers, regulators, and stakeholders should negotiate a consensus solution for insurer use of genetic information that balances between social and economic considerations. Without compromise, continued saliency and a weakened political economy of insurers will foster continued entrenched debate on the issue.

Should Australia Ban the Use of Genetic Test Results in Life Insurance?

Under current Australian regulation, life insurance companies can require applicants to disclose all genetic test results, including results from research or direct-to-consumer tests. Life insurers can then use this genetic information in underwriting and policy decisions for mutually rated products, including life, permanent disability, and total income protection insurance. Over the past decade, many countries have implemented moratoria or legislative bans on the use of genetic information by life insurers. The Australian government, by contrast, has not reviewed regulation since 2005 when it failed to ensure implementation of recommendations made by the Australian Law Reform Commission. In that time, the Australian life insurance industry has been left to self-regulate its use of genetic information. As a result, insurance fears in Australia now are leading to deterred uptake of genetic testing by at-risk individuals and deterred participation in medical research, both of which have been documented. As the potential for genomic medicine grows, public trust and engagement are critical for successful implementation. Concerns around life insurance may become a barrier to the development of genomic health care, research, and public health initiatives in Australia, and the issue should be publicly addressed. We argue a moratorium on the use of genetic information by life insurers should be enacted while appropriate longer term policy is determined and implemented.

A beekeeper's perspective on the neonicotinoid ban

Bees and agrochemicals have a long history. For example, the first volume of IBRA's journal Bee World in 1919 contains mention of poisoning of bees by spraying an orchard with lead arsenate. Bees being insects, it is self-evident that the use of insecticides to control crop pests poses a risk to them. Bee poisoning incidents became a very serious problem in the 1960s and 1970s with spraying of, in particular, oilseed rape with organophosphorus compounds. The introduction of carbamates and then especially synthetic pyrethroids reduced these problems. Data from the Wildlife Incident Investigation Scheme show that in recent years there have been very few poisoning incidents in the United Kingdom that can be attributed to agricultural insecticides. The introduction of neonicotinoid insecticides has, however, been very controversial. Almost as soon as they were introduced in the 1990s, French beekeepers blamed colony losses on imidacloprid used on sunflowers and maize, but restrictions on its use did not lead to a reduction in losses or to a reduction in beekeepers' concerns. Acute pesticide poisoning incidents by neonicotinoids in Germany and Italy in 2008 further sealed their reputation. Despite laboratory evidence showing their harm, field experience remains equivocal, and many commercial beekeepers continue to move their colonies to oilseed rape crops for honey production. The neonicotinoid moratorium has undoubtedly led to the increased use of older insecticides, and the effect of this on bee populations is unknown and unquantified. Many beekeepers are currently confused by the conflicting evidence. © 2016 Society of Chemical Industry.

Psychoanalysis of maturescence (definition, metapsychology, and clinical practice)

This article offers an entirely new way of addressing middle age or mid-life. It uses the neologism maturescence to denote this process's metapsychological feature, and it proposes a meta-psychology of maturescence in order to allow a 'direct understanding of maturescence' instead of the 'indirect understanding of maturescence', which psychoanalytic literature generally alludes to. The paper examines somatic processes specific to male and female climacterics and is focused on to the tension between the soma and the body. It examines the drive increase that Freud posed in climacterics and the somatic climacteric imbalance that begets specific drive activity demanding psychic work, with very different pathways depending on the individual's specific working-through activity. It discusses what happens to the individual when he/she is no longer able to procreate and begins to age; why this process is equivalent for individuals who had children and for others who could not or did not. This somatic event provides a universal constant from which it is possible to understand any individual variable.

Governing solar geoengineering research as it leaves the laboratory

One of the greatest controversies in geoengineering policy concerns the next stages of solar radiation management research, and when and how it leaves the laboratory. Citing numerous risks and concerns, a range of prominent commentators have called for field experiments to be delayed until there is formalized research governance, such as an international agreement. As a piece of pragmatic policy analysis, this paper explores the practicalities and implications of demands for 'governance before research'. It concludes that 'governance before research' is a desirable goal, but that a delay in experimentation-a moratorium-would probably be an ineffective and counterproductive way to achieve it. Firstly, it is very unlikely that a moratorium could be imposed. Secondly, even if it were practicable it seems that a temporary ban on field experiments would have at best a mixed effect addressing the main risks and concerns, while blocking and stigmatizing safe research and delaying the development of good governance practices from learning by doing. The paper suggests a number of steps to ensure 'governance before research' that can be taken in the absence of an international agreement or national legislation, emphasizing the roles of researchers and research funders in developing and implementing good practices.