Responsibility Gap(s) Due to the Introduction of AI in Healthcare: An Ubuntu-Inspired Approach.

Due to its enormous potential, artificial intelligence (AI) can transform healthcare on a seemingly infinite scale. However, as we continue to explore the immense potential of AI, it is vital to consider the ethical concerns associated with its development and deployment. One specific concern that has been flagged in the literature is the responsibility gap (RG) due to the introduction of AI in healthcare. When the use of an AI algorithm or system results in a negative outcome for a patient(s), to whom can or should responsibility for that outcome be assigned? Although the concept of the RG was introduced in Anglo-American and European philosophy, this paper aims to broaden the debate by providing an Ubuntu-inspired perspective on the RG. Ubuntu, deeply rooted in African philosophy, calls for collective responsibility, and offers a uniquely forward-looking approach to address the alleged RG caused by AI in healthcare. An Ubuntu-inspired perspective can serve as a valuable guide and tool when addressing the alleged RG. Incorporating Ubuntu into the AI ethics discourse can contribute to a more ethical and responsible integration of AI in healthcare.

Navigating the Landscape of Digital Twins in Medicine: A Relational Bioethical Inquiry.

This perspective article explores the use of digital twins (DTs) in medicine, highlighting its capacity to simulate risks and personalize treatments while examining the emerging bioethical concerns. Central concerns include power dynamics, exclusion, and misrepresentation. We propose adopting a relational bioethical approach that advocates for a comprehensive assessment of DTs in medicine, extending beyond individual interactions to consider broader structural relations and varying levels of access to power. This can be achieved through two key relational recommendations: acknowledging the impact of uneven relational structures on access to medical care and promoting social justice by evaluating resource allocation. While DTs in medicine offer promising advancements, a relational bioethical lens may provide a nuanced understanding, fostering equitable, inclusive and responsible integration of DTs into medical practice.

Anticipatory gaps challenge the public governance of heritable human genome editing.

Considering public moral attitudes is a hallmark of the anticipatory governance of emerging biotechnologies, such as heritable human genome editing. However, such anticipatory governance often overlooks that future morality is open to change and that future generations may perform different moral assessments on the very biotechnologies we are trying to govern in the present. In this article, we identify an 'anticipatory gap' that has not been sufficiently addressed in the discussion on the public governance of heritable genome editing, namely, uncertainty about the moral visions of future generations about the emerging applications that we are currently attempting to govern now. This paper motivates the relevance of this anticipatory gap, identifying the challenges it generates and offering various recommendations so that moral uncertainty does not lead to governance paralysis with regard to human germline genome editing.

Take five? A coherentist argument why medical AI does not require a new ethical principle.

With the growing application of machine learning models in medicine, principlist bioethics has been put forward as needing revision. This paper reflects on the dominant trope in AI ethics to include a new 'principle of explicability' alongside the traditional four principles of bioethics that make up the theory of principlism. It specifically suggests that these four principles are sufficient and challenges the relevance of explicability as a separate ethical principle by emphasizing the coherentist affinity of principlism. We argue that, through specification, the properties of explicability are already covered by the four bioethical principles. The paper finishes by anticipating an objection that coherent principles could not facilitate technology induced change and are not well-suited to tackle moral differences.

Age-related hearing loss and "hearables": An agenda for moral considerations.

Rapid advances in digital hearing technologies, also known as hearables, are expected to disrupt the direct-to-consumer health market. For older adults with higher incidence of hearing loss, such disruption could reduce hearing problems, increase accessibility to hearing aids, and mitigate related stigmas. This paper delves into the intersection of disruptive innovation and hearables within the realm of biomedical ethics. Through a comprehensive exploration, we shed light on the ethical implications surrounding hearables. By critically evaluating the key ethical advantages and drawbacks, we find that no single concern presents an insurmountable a priori objection to hearables. We conclude with some ideas to maximize the benefits of hearables and further promote opportunities for equitable hearing health.

The information, control, and value models of mobile health-driven empowerment.

Mobile health tools are often said to empower users by providing them with the information they need to exercise control over their health. We aim to bring clarity to this claim, and in doing so explore the relationship between empowerment and autonomy. We have identified three distinct models embedded in the empowerment rhetoric: empowerment as information, empowerment as control, and empowerment as values. Each distinct model of empowerment gives rise to an associated problem. These problems, the Problem of Interpretation, the Value Alignment Problem, and the Priority Problem, show that mobile health tools in their current form are either insufficient for empowerment or are self-defeating. These digital health technologies encourage users to adopt an individualized conception of autonomy, one that may weaken the doctor-patient relationship and undermine practices in shared decision making, and ultimately may not deliver on improving the health outcomes for those that need it the most.

'False hope' in assisted reproduction: the normative significance of the external outlook and moral negotiation.

Despite the frequent invocation of 'false hope' and possible related moral concerns in the context of assisted reproduction technologies, a focused ethical and conceptual problematisation of this concept seems to be lacking. We argue that an invocation of 'false hope' only makes sense if the fulfilment of a desired outcome (eg, a successful fertility treatment) is impossible, and if it is attributed from an external perspective. The evaluation incurred by this third party may foreclose a given perspective from being an object of hope. However, this evaluation is not a mere statistical calculation or observation based on probabilities but is dependent on several factors that should be acknowledgeable as morally relevant. This is important because it allows room for, and encourages, reasoned disagreement and moral negotiation. Accordingly, the object of hope itself, whether or not based on socially embedded desires or practices, can be a topic of debate.

Revisiting the ought implies can dictum in light of disruptive medical innovation.

It is a dominant dictum in ethics that 'ought implies can' (OIC): if an agent morally ought to do an action, the agent must be capable of performing that action. Yet, with current technological developments, such as in direct-to-consumer genomics, big data analytics and wearable technologies, there may be reasons to reorient this ethical principle. It is our modest aim in this article to explore how the current wave of allegedly disruptive innovation calls for a renewed interest for this dictum. As an effect of prevention and prediction oriented technological innovation, an increased focus on assumedly controllable lifestyle risks may be anticipated. For lay people who might turn into patients, this may entail a reinforced behavior-based individual responsibilisation. Holding on to the OIC dictum, such responsibilisation seems to require that individuals can actually control what is framed as 'lifestyle risks' when there is not always a reliable consensus about what one should do. As such, reference to OIC may be mobilised in function of a political task of designing institutions so as to enable such choice and control.

Heritable genome editing: ethical aspects of a developing domain.

In the past decade, scientific developments in human germline genome editing (GGE) have reinvigorated questions about research ethics, responsible innovation, and what it means to do good in the field of reproductive biology and medicine. In recent years, it has become part of the ethical debate on GGE whether categorical objections about (un)naturalness, dignity, respect for the gene pool as common heritage, are and should be supplemented by more pragmatic questions about safety, utility, efficacy, and potential 'misuse', which seem to become more dominant in the moral discussion. This mini-review summarizes the morally relevant aspects of the rapidly developing domain of GGE, focusing on reproductive applications and with special attention to the ethical questions pertaining to how this technology may affect the interests of those that come to be by means of it. While vital, this encompasses more than safety considerations. Taking this perspective, it will be crucial to engage with normative questions about how GGE maps on the importance of accommodating future parents' preference to have genetically related children, and how far we should go to facilitate this. Similarly, a comprehensive ethical debate about 'appropriate application' of GGE cannot shake off the more fundamental question about how notions like 'normalcy', 'quality of life', and 'disability' can be conceptualized. This is crucial in view of respecting persons whichever traits they have and in view of acceptable boundaries to parental responsibilities.

NextGEM: Next-Generation Integrated Sensing and Analytical System for Monitoring and Assessing Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Field Exposure and Health.

The evolution of emerging technologies that use Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Field (RF-EMF) has increased the interest of the scientific community and society regarding the possible adverse effects on human health and the environment. This article provides NextGEM's vision to assure safety for EU citizens when employing existing and future EMF-based telecommunication technologies. This is accomplished by generating relevant knowledge that ascertains appropriate prevention and control/actuation actions regarding RF-EMF exposure in residential, public, and occupational settings. Fulfilling this vision, NextGEM commits to the need for a healthy living and working environment under safe RF-EMF exposure conditions that can be trusted by people and be in line with the regulations and laws developed by public authorities. NextGEM provides a framework for generating health-relevant scientific knowledge and data on new scenarios of exposure to RF-EMF in multiple frequency bands and developing and validating tools for evidence-based risk assessment. Finally, NextGEM's Innovation and Knowledge Hub (NIKH) will offer a standardized way for European regulatory authorities and the scientific community to store and assess project outcomes and provide access to findable, accessible, interoperable, and reusable (FAIR) data.

The IVG 'relatedness paradox': researchers should mind speculation.

Companies and academic laboratories are pursuing the production of gametes from stem cells. Researchers should be active participants in discussions about speculative scenarios, to avoid this endeavor to accommodate genetic parenthood undermines the value it is meant to serve, because of either unrealistic or insufficient ethical reflection.

Effects of long-term exposure to 50 Hz magnetic fields on cell viability, genetic damage, and sensitivity to mutagen-induced damage.

Until today, it remains controversial whether long-term exposure to extremely low-frequency magnetic fields (ELF-MF) below the legislative exposure limits could result in adverse human health effects. In the present study, the effects of long-term in vitro MF exposure on three different study endpoints (cell viability, genetic damage, and sensitivity to damage induced by known mutagens) were investigated in the human B lymphoblastoid (TK6) cell line. Cells were exposed to 50 Hz MF at three selected magnetic flux densities (i.e., 10, 100, and 500 µT) for different exposure periods ranging from 96h up to 6 weeks. Cell viability following MF exposure was assessed using the ATP-based cell viability assay. Effects of MF exposure on cell genetic damage and cell sensitivity to mutagen-induced damage were evaluated using the in vitro alkaline comet assay and the in vitro cytokinesis block micronucleus assay. The results showed that long-term exposure up to 96h to 50 Hz MF at all tested flux densities could significantly increase TK6 cell viability. In contrast, long-term MF exposure did not affect cell genetic damage, and long-term pre-exposure to MF did not change cell sensitivity to damage induced by known mutagens. At certain time points, statistically significant difference in genotoxicity test results were observed between the MF-exposed cells and the control cells. However, these observations could not be confirmed in the repeat experiments, indicating that they are probably not biologically significant.

We need to talk about disruption in bioethics: a commentary on Rueda, Pugh and Savulescu.

Rueda, Pugh, and Savulescu intervene in the debate of reprogenetic enhancement technologies that can lead to ethical disruption. In response, we think such innovations may not so much disrupt biomedical ethics but instead may reanimate older debates in this field.

Ethical, Translational, and Legal Issues Surrounding the Novel Adoption of Ectogestative Technologies.

Increasing numbers of research teams are investigating the feasibility of developing artificial amnion and placenta technology (AAPT), commonly referred to as "artificial womb technology". This technology, aimed at supporting ex vivo gestation, has not yet been tested in humans, but it has been stated that we are closer to clinical application than ever before as breakthroughs in animal studies demonstrate good proof of principle. With these proof-of-concept models, further dissemination of AAPT as a research modality is expected. In this review article, we consider the ethical implications of the most imminent anticipated applications for AAPT. We focus specifically on the specific ethical complications regarding the improvements this technology may offer to conventional neonatal intensive care, its potential utility in facilitating prenatal interventions, and some of the broader socio-legal implications such as the debates about abortion access and reproductive and gestational choices. We discuss translational and societal questions when it comes to designing and developing this technology, like commitments to value-sensitive design, along with an examination of the legal and moral status of the entity gestating ex utero, which will be relevant for how it ought to be treated in the context of these various applications. From these perspectives, this review identifies the ethical questions that we believe to be most pressing in the development and potential introduction of AAPT, with due attention to their manifestation as translational and legal issues.

Robot Technology for the Elderly and the Value of Veracity: Disruptive Technology or Reinvigorating Entrenched Principles?

The implementation of care robotics in care settings is identified by some authors as a disruptive innovation, in the sense that it will upend the praxis of care. It is an open ethical question whether this alleged disruption will also have a transformative impact on established ethical concepts and principles. One prevalent worry is that the implementation of care robots will turn deception into a routine component of elderly care, at least to the extent that these robots will function as simulacra for something that they are not (i.e. human caregivers). At face value, this may indeed seem to indicate a concern for how this technology may upend existing practices and relationships within a care setting. Yet, on closer inspection, this reaction may rather point to a rediscovery and a revaluation of a particularly well-entrenched value or virtue, i.e. veracity. The virtue of veracity is one of the values that is mobilized to argue against a substitution of human caregivers (while a combination of care robots and human caregivers is much more accepted). The subject of this paper is to explore how the moral panic surrounding care robots should not so much be interpreted as an anticipated and probable disruptor in a care setting, but rather as a sensitizing - in a way conservationist - argument that identifies veracity as an established value that is supposed to be protected and advanced in present day and future care settings.

The curious case of "trust" in the light of changing doctor-patient relationships.

The centrality of trust in traditional doctor-patient relationships has been criticized as inordinately paternalistic, yet in today's discussions about medical ethics-mostly in response to disruptive innovation in healthcare-trust reappears as an asset to enable empowerment. To turn away from paternalistic trust-based doctor-patient relationships and to arrive at an empowerment-based medical model, increasing reference is made to the importance of nurturing trust in technologies that are supposed to bring that empowerment. In this article we stimulate discussion about why the move towards patient empowerment may not be able to keep clear of the criticism of trust in traditional patient-doctor relationships. First, we explore how such a shift in trust dynamics might corrode patient empowerment in the name of patient empowerment. Second, we examine how a translocation of trust may at best push the "trust issue" elsewhere and at worst make it harder to evaluate trustworthiness.