Moral philosophy has much more to offer.

Moral philosophy is a rich tradition that contains many alternative approaches to determining what is right and wrong. A limited account that only considers (hedonistic) utilitarianism and deontology cannot do justice to moral philosophy. It is necessary to also consider the many other general-purpose moral theories that have been proposed, as well as the approaches developed in various branches of applied ethics, such as healthcare ethics, the ethics of technology, and the ethics of risk.

Genetically modified (GM) late blight-resistant potato and consumer attitudes before and after a field visit.

Late blight, caused by Phytophthora infestans, is the most devastating disease in potato production. Here, we show full late blight resistance in a location with a genetically diverse pathogen population with the use of GM potato stacked with three resistance (R) genes over three seasons. In addition, using this field trials, we demonstrate that in-the-field intervention among consumers led to change for more favorable attitude generally toward GM crops.

The ethics of explantation.

BACKGROUND: With the increased use of implanted medical devices follows a large number of explantations. Implants are removed for a wide range of reasons, including manufacturing defects, recovery making the device unnecessary, battery depletion, availability of new and better models, and patients asking for a removal. Explantation gives rise to a wide range of ethical issues, but the discussion of these problems is scattered over many clinical disciplines. METHODS: Information from multiple clinical disciplines was synthesized and analysed in order to provide a comprehensive approach to the ethical issues involved in the explantation of medical implants. RESULTS: Discussions and recommendations are offered on pre-implantation information about a possible future explantation, risk-benefit assessments of explantation, elective explantations demanded by the patient, explantation of implants inserted for a clinical trial, patient registers, quality assurance, routines for investigating explanted implants, and demands on manufacturers to prioritize increased service time in battery-driven implants and to market fewer but more thoroughly tested models of implants. CONCLUSION: Special emphasis is given to the issue of control or ownership over implants, which underlies many of the ethical problems concerning explantation. It is proposed that just like transplants, implants that fulfil functions normally carried out by biological organs should be counted as supplemented body parts. This means that the patient has a strong and inalienable right to the implant, but upon explantation it loses that status.

Who should be tested in a pandemic? Ethical considerations.

BACKGROUND: In the initial phase of the Covid-19 pandemic, difficult decisions had to be made on the allocation of testing resources. Similar situations can arise in future pandemics. Therefore, careful consideration of who should be tested is an important part of pandemic preparedness. We focus on four ethical aspects of that problem: how to prioritize scarce testing resources, the regulation of commercial direct-to-consumer test services, testing of unauthorized immigrants, and obligatory testing. MAIN TEXT: The distribution of scarce resources for testing: We emphasize the use of needs-based criteria, but also acknowledge the importance of choosing a testing strategy that contributes efficiently to stopping the overall spread of the disease. Commercial direct-to-consumer test services: Except in cases of acute scarcity, such services will in practice have to be allowed. We propose that they should be subject to regulation that ensures test quality and adequate information to users. Testing of unauthorized immigrants, their children and other people with unclear legal status: Like everyone else, these individuals may be in need of testing, and it is in society's interest to reach them with testing in order to stop the spread of the disease. A society that offers comprehensive medical services to unauthorized immigrants is in a much better position to reach them in a pandemic than a society that previously excluded them from healthcare. Obligatory testing: While there are often strong reasons for universal testing in residential areas or on workplaces, there are in most cases better ways to achieve testing coverage than to make testing mandatory. CONCLUSION: In summary, we propose (1) decision-making primarily based on needs-based criteria, (2) strict regulation but not prohibition of direct-to-consumer test services, (3) test services offered to unauthorized immigrants, preferably as part of comprehensive medical services, and (4) broad outreach of testing services whenever possible, but in general not obligatory testing.

Neuroethics for Fantasyland or for the Clinic? The Limitations of Speculative Ethics.

What purpose can be served by empirically unsubstantiated speculation in ethics? In answering that question, we need to distinguish between the major branches of ethics. In foundational moral philosophy, the use of speculative examples is warranted to the extent that ethical principles and theories are assumed to be applicable even under the extreme circumstances referred to in these examples. Such an assumption is in need of justification, and it cannot just be taken for granted. In applied ethics, the use of unrealistic scenarios is more difficult to justify. It can be positively harmful if it diverts our attention from more urgent issues. Neuroethics is one of the areas of applied ethics where speculative scenarios have taken up much of the attention that could instead have been devoted to problems that are relevant for the treatment and care of patients. Speculative ethics has often been defended with mere possibility arguments that may at first hand seem difficult to refute. It is shown with examples how such claims can be defeated with a combination of science and argumentation analysis.

Options to Reform the European Union Legislation on GMOs: Post-authorization and Beyond.

We discuss options to reform the EU genetically modified organism (GMO) regulatory framework, make risk assessment and decision-making more consistent with scientific principles, and lay the groundwork for international coherence. In this third of three articles, we focus on labeling and coexistence as well as discuss the political reality and potential ways forward.

Options to Reform the European Union Legislation on GMOs: Risk Governance.

Here, we discuss options to reform the EU genetically modified organism (GMO) regulatory framework, to make risk assessment and decision-making more consistent with scientific principles, and to lay the groundwork for international coherence. We discussed the scope and definitions in a previous article and, thus, here we focus on the procedures for risk assessment and risk management.

Options to Reform the European Union Legislation on GMOs: Scope and Definitions.

We discuss options to reform the EU genetically modified organisms (GMO) regulatory framework, make risk assessment and decision-making more consistent with scientific principles, and lay the groundwork for international coherence. The first in a three-part series, this article focuses on reform options related to the scope of the legislation and the GMO definition.

The Ethics of Cranial Nerve Implants.

This overview of ethical and social issues pertaining to cranial nerve implants covers informed consent; risk-benefit assessments; security against unauthorized reprogramming or privacy intrusion; explantation; psychological side effects; equity and social distribution, cultural effects, for instance, on the deaf subculture; enhancement; and research ethics.

Improvement principles.

INTRODUCTION: The improvement principles are a group of safety principles whose central message is that no risk level above zero is fully satisfactory, and that we should therefore always strive to improve safety. The major safety principles in this group are: as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA), best available technology (BAT), the substitution principle, vision zero, and continuous improvement. METHOD: This article investigates their similarities and differences, the ways in which they can incorporate compromises with objectives other than safety, and the difficulties that may arise in their application. A particular emphasis is put on comparisons with two major competing groups of principles, namely acceptance principles, which draw a sharp line between acceptable and unacceptable states of affairs, and weighing principles such as CBA that search for an optimized compromise between safety and other objectives. RESULTS: In comparison to their main competitors, the improvement principles have the important advantage of consistently encouraging safety enhancements. However, some of the problems in their application can probably best be tackled by including them in a combined approach that also makes use of acceptance and/or weighing principles. Two such combined approaches are proposed. The choice between them should be based on the underlying value structure of the decision problem. Practical applications: Guidance is given for the choice of safety principles and for the combined use of more than one such principle.

How to Perform an Ethical Risk Analysis (eRA).

Ethical analysis is often needed in the preparation of policy decisions on risk. A three-step method is proposed for performing an ethical risk analysis (eRA). In the first step, the people concerned are identified and categorized in terms of the distinct but compatible roles of being risk-exposed, a beneficiary, or a decisionmaker. In the second step, a more detailed classification of roles and role combinations is performed, and ethically problematic role combinations are identified. In the third step, further ethical deliberation takes place, with an emphasis on individual risk-benefit weighing, distributional analysis, rights analysis, and power analysis. Ethical issues pertaining to subsidiary risk roles, such as those of experts and journalists, are also treated in this phase. An eRA should supplement, not replace, a traditional risk analysis that puts emphasis on the probabilities and severities of undesirable events but does not cover ethical issues such as agency, interpersonal relationships, and justice.

The Ethics of Making Patients Responsible.

In their daily clinical work, healthcare professionals generally apply what seems to be a double standard for the responsibility of patients. On the one hand, patients are encouraged to take responsibility for lifestyle changes that can improve their chances of good health. On the other hand, when patients fail to follow such recommendations, they are not held responsible for the failure. This seeming inconsistency is explained in terms of the distinction between task responsibility and blame responsibility. The double standard for responsibility is shown to be epistemologically rational, ethically commendable, and therapeutically advantageous. However, this non-blaming approach to patient responsibility is threatened by proposals to assign lower priority in healthcare to patients who are themselves responsible for their disease. Such responsibility-based priority setting requires that physicians assign blame responsibility to their patients, a practice that would run into conflict with the ethical foundations of the patient-physician relationship. Therefore, such proposals should be rejected.

Science denial as a form of pseudoscience.

Science denialism poses a serious threat to human health and the long-term sustainability of human civilization. Although it has recently been rather extensively discussed, this discussion has rarely been connected to the extensive literature on pseudoscience and the science-pseudoscience demarcation. This contribution argues that science denialism should be seen as one of the two major forms of pseudoscience, alongside of pseudotheory promotion. A detailed comparison is made between three prominent forms of science denialism, namely relativity theory denialism, evolution denialism, and climate science denialism. Several characteristics are identified that distinguish science denialism from other forms of pseudoscience, in particular its persistent fabrication of fake controversies, the extraordinary male dominance among its activists, and its strong connection with various forms of right-wing politics. It is argued that the scientific response to science denialism has to be conceived with these characteristics in mind. In particular, it is important to expose the fabricated fake controversies for what they are and to reveal how science denialists consistently use deviant criteria of assent to distort the scientific process.

Challenges, dilemmas, and quality criteria for safety reviews.

Five generic dilemmas shared by most safety reviews are identified, namely the complexity dilemma, the specialisation dilemma, the criteria dilemma, the independence dilemma and the ethical dilemma. These dilemmas are not always made sufficiently transparent, which may lead to a too optimistic view of what can be achieved by safety reviews. A two-dimensional characterisation of safety reviews is suggested; the dimensions are the degree of independence and the scope of the review. In conclusion ten quality criteria are proposed that can be used to cope with the dilemmas of conducting safety reviews.

The Ethics of Doing Ethics.

Ethicists have investigated ethical problems in other disciplines, but there has not been much discussion of the ethics of their own activities. Research in ethics has many ethical problems in common with other areas of research, and it also has problems of its own. The researcher's integrity is more precarious than in most other disciplines, and therefore even stronger procedural checks are needed to protect it. The promotion of some standpoints in ethical issues may be socially harmful, and even our decisions as to which issues we label as "ethical" may have unintended and potentially harmful social consequences. It can be argued that ethicists have an obligation to make positive contributions to society, but the practical implications of such an obligation are not easily identified. This article provides an overview of ethical issues that arise in research into ethics and in the application of such research. It ends with a list of ten practical proposals for how these issues should be dealt with.

Assigning ethical weights to clinical signs observed during toxicity testing.

Reducing the number of laboratory animals used and refining experimental procedures to enhance animal welfare are fundamental questions to be considered in connection with animal experimentation. Here, we explored the use of cardinal ethical weights for clinical signs and symptoms in rodents by conducting trade-off interviews with members of Swedish Animal Ethics Committees in order to derive such weights for nine typical clinical signs of toxicity. The participants interviewed represent researchers, politically nominated political nominees and representatives of animal welfare organizations. We observed no statistically significant differences between these groups with respect to the magnitude of the ethical weights assigned, though the political nominees tended to assign lower weights. Overall, hunched posture was considered the most severe clinical sign and body weight loss the least severe. The ethical weights assigned varied considerably between individuals, from zero to infinite value, indicating discrepancies in prioritization of reduction and refinement. Cardinal ethical weights may be utilized to include both animal welfare refinement and reduction of animal use in designing as well as in retrospective assessment of animal experiments. Such weights may also be used to estimate ethical costs of animal experiments.

How to be Cautious but Open to Learning: Time to Update Biotechnology and GMO Legislation.

Precautionary measures to protect human health and the environment should be science based. This implies that they should be directed at a potential danger for which there is credible scientific evidence (although that evidence need not be conclusive). Furthermore, protective measures should be updated as relevant science advances. This means that decisionmakers should be prepared to strengthen the precautionary measures if the danger turns out to be greater than initially suspected, and to reduce or lift them, should the danger prove to be smaller. Most current legislation on agricultural biotechnology has not been scientifically updated. Therefore, it reflects outdated criteria for identifying products that can cause problems. Modern knowledge in genetics, plant biology, and ecology has provided us with much better criteria that risk analysts can use to identify the potentially problematic breeding projects at which precautionary measures should be directed. Legislation on agricultural biotechnology should be scientifically updated. Furthermore, legislators should learn from this example that regulations based on the current state of science need to have inbuilt mechanisms for revisions and adjustments in response to future developments in science.

Experiments: Why and How?

An experiment, in the standard scientific sense of the term, is a procedure in which some object of study is subjected to interventions (manipulations) that aim at obtaining a predictable outcome or at least predictable aspects of the outcome. The distinction between an experiment and a non-experimental observation is important since they are tailored to different epistemic needs. Experimentation has its origin in pre-scientific technological experiments that were undertaken in order to find the best technological means to achieve chosen ends. Important parts of the methodological arsenal of modern experimental science can be traced back to this pre-scientific, technological tradition. It is claimed that experimentation involves a unique combination of acting and observing, a combination whose unique epistemological properties have not yet been fully clarified.

The Concepts of Risk, Safety, and Security: Applications in Everyday Language.

The concepts of risk, safety, and security have received substantial academic interest. Several assumptions exist about their nature and relation. Besides academic use, the words risk, safety, and security are frequent in ordinary language, for example, in media reporting. In this article, we analyze the concepts of risk, safety, and security, and their relation, based on empirical observation of their actual everyday use. The "behavioral profiles" of the nouns risk, safety, and security and the adjectives risky, safe, and secure are coded and compared regarding lexical and grammatical contexts. The main findings are: (1) the three nouns risk, safety, and security, and the two adjectives safe and secure, have widespread use in different senses, which will make any attempt to define them in a single unified manner extremely difficult; (2) the relationship between the central risk terms is complex and only partially confirms the distinctions commonly made between the terms in specialized terminology; (3) whereas most attempts to define risk in specialized terminology have taken the term to have a quantitative meaning, nonquantitative meanings dominate in everyday language, and numerical meanings are rare; and (4) the three adjectives safe, secure, and risky are frequently used in comparative form. This speaks against interpretations that would take them as absolute, all-or-nothing concepts.