Cargando…

Students’ attitudes towards somatic genome editing versus genome editing of the germline using an example of familial leukemia

Although the discussion on possibilities and pitfalls of genome editing is ever present, limited qualitative data on the attitudes of students, who will come into contact with this technology within a social and professional context, is available. The attitude of 97 medical students and 103 students...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Vajen, Beate, Ronez, Joelle, Rathje, Wiebke, Heinisch, Laura, Ebeling, Smilla, Gebhard, Ulrich, Hößle, Corinna, Schlegelberger, Brigitte
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8241980/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33963968
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12687-021-00528-1
_version_ 1783715528820391936
author Vajen, Beate
Ronez, Joelle
Rathje, Wiebke
Heinisch, Laura
Ebeling, Smilla
Gebhard, Ulrich
Hößle, Corinna
Schlegelberger, Brigitte
author_facet Vajen, Beate
Ronez, Joelle
Rathje, Wiebke
Heinisch, Laura
Ebeling, Smilla
Gebhard, Ulrich
Hößle, Corinna
Schlegelberger, Brigitte
author_sort Vajen, Beate
collection PubMed
description Although the discussion on possibilities and pitfalls of genome editing is ever present, limited qualitative data on the attitudes of students, who will come into contact with this technology within a social and professional context, is available. The attitude of 97 medical students and 103 students of other subjects from Hannover and Oldenburg, Germany, was analyzed in winter 2017/18. For this purpose, two dilemmas on somatic and germline genome editing concerning familial leukemia were developed. After reading the dilemmas, the students filled out a paper-and-pencil test with five open questions. The qualitative evaluation of the answers was carried by a deductive-inductive procedure of content analysis. There was a high approval for the use of somatic genome editing. When it came to germline genome editing, concerns were raised regarding enhancement, interventions in nature, and loss of uniqueness. The students recognized that somatic genome editing and germline genome editing prove different ethical challenges and need to be judged separately. Many students expressed not feeling fully informed. The results of this project show the importance of educating the public about the possibilities, limitations, and risks of somatic and germline genome editing. We recommend that this should already be addressed in schools in order to optimally prepare students and adults for participation in public discourse. Especially for patients affected by genetic diseases, it is of great importance that the treating physicians and geneticists are sufficiently informed about the method of genome editing to ensure good counseling. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12687-021-00528-1.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8241980
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-82419802021-07-13 Students’ attitudes towards somatic genome editing versus genome editing of the germline using an example of familial leukemia Vajen, Beate Ronez, Joelle Rathje, Wiebke Heinisch, Laura Ebeling, Smilla Gebhard, Ulrich Hößle, Corinna Schlegelberger, Brigitte J Community Genet Original Article Although the discussion on possibilities and pitfalls of genome editing is ever present, limited qualitative data on the attitudes of students, who will come into contact with this technology within a social and professional context, is available. The attitude of 97 medical students and 103 students of other subjects from Hannover and Oldenburg, Germany, was analyzed in winter 2017/18. For this purpose, two dilemmas on somatic and germline genome editing concerning familial leukemia were developed. After reading the dilemmas, the students filled out a paper-and-pencil test with five open questions. The qualitative evaluation of the answers was carried by a deductive-inductive procedure of content analysis. There was a high approval for the use of somatic genome editing. When it came to germline genome editing, concerns were raised regarding enhancement, interventions in nature, and loss of uniqueness. The students recognized that somatic genome editing and germline genome editing prove different ethical challenges and need to be judged separately. Many students expressed not feeling fully informed. The results of this project show the importance of educating the public about the possibilities, limitations, and risks of somatic and germline genome editing. We recommend that this should already be addressed in schools in order to optimally prepare students and adults for participation in public discourse. Especially for patients affected by genetic diseases, it is of great importance that the treating physicians and geneticists are sufficiently informed about the method of genome editing to ensure good counseling. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12687-021-00528-1. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2021-05-08 2021-07 /pmc/articles/PMC8241980/ /pubmed/33963968 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12687-021-00528-1 Text en © The Author(s) 2021, corrected publication 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Article
Vajen, Beate
Ronez, Joelle
Rathje, Wiebke
Heinisch, Laura
Ebeling, Smilla
Gebhard, Ulrich
Hößle, Corinna
Schlegelberger, Brigitte
Students’ attitudes towards somatic genome editing versus genome editing of the germline using an example of familial leukemia
title Students’ attitudes towards somatic genome editing versus genome editing of the germline using an example of familial leukemia
title_full Students’ attitudes towards somatic genome editing versus genome editing of the germline using an example of familial leukemia
title_fullStr Students’ attitudes towards somatic genome editing versus genome editing of the germline using an example of familial leukemia
title_full_unstemmed Students’ attitudes towards somatic genome editing versus genome editing of the germline using an example of familial leukemia
title_short Students’ attitudes towards somatic genome editing versus genome editing of the germline using an example of familial leukemia
title_sort students’ attitudes towards somatic genome editing versus genome editing of the germline using an example of familial leukemia
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8241980/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33963968
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12687-021-00528-1
work_keys_str_mv AT vajenbeate studentsattitudestowardssomaticgenomeeditingversusgenomeeditingofthegermlineusinganexampleoffamilialleukemia
AT ronezjoelle studentsattitudestowardssomaticgenomeeditingversusgenomeeditingofthegermlineusinganexampleoffamilialleukemia
AT rathjewiebke studentsattitudestowardssomaticgenomeeditingversusgenomeeditingofthegermlineusinganexampleoffamilialleukemia
AT heinischlaura studentsattitudestowardssomaticgenomeeditingversusgenomeeditingofthegermlineusinganexampleoffamilialleukemia
AT ebelingsmilla studentsattitudestowardssomaticgenomeeditingversusgenomeeditingofthegermlineusinganexampleoffamilialleukemia
AT gebhardulrich studentsattitudestowardssomaticgenomeeditingversusgenomeeditingofthegermlineusinganexampleoffamilialleukemia
AT hoßlecorinna studentsattitudestowardssomaticgenomeeditingversusgenomeeditingofthegermlineusinganexampleoffamilialleukemia
AT schlegelbergerbrigitte studentsattitudestowardssomaticgenomeeditingversusgenomeeditingofthegermlineusinganexampleoffamilialleukemia