试论人类基因编辑的伦理界限——从道德、哲学和宗教的角度看“贺建奎事件”
|
摘要
现行的基因伦理学和生命伦理学有许多合理之处,如对基因编辑技术应用的严格限制和对增强性基因编辑技术的禁止。但是,对于生殖系基因编辑技术的研究和应用,现行的基因伦理学虽有警告,但却不加禁止,甚至在其大方向上给以鼓励,这不能不说是一种严重的不足或缺陷。为此有必要引入"生殖系基因编辑禁止原则"。这些基因伦理原则是以自然宗教和人类中心主义为其形而上学基础的,目的是尽可能地保持人类基因池的纯洁性。自然宗教是与科学并行不悖、相互促进的广义宗教,无论在西方还是在中国都是源远流长的。为从源头上杜绝"贺建奎事件"的再次发生,我们应该双管齐下:一方面建立健全规章制度,另一方面为规章制度奠定适当的形而上学基础。
There are many reasonable points in current genetic ethics and bioethics, which include restrictions on the application of gene editing technology and the prohibition of the enhancive gene editing.However, in terms of the use and study of germline gene editing, current genetic ethics have only issued a warning rather than any prohibition; they even give it encouragement in the general direction. This has to be considered as a serious inadequacy or defect of current genetic ethics. For all of this, it is necessary to introduce the ‘principle of prohibiting germline gene editing'. This kind of principle of genetic ethics is based on natural religion and anthropocentrism, which can be regarded as its metaphysical foundations, with the purpose of keeping the human gene pool as pure as possible. Natural religion is a religion in the broad sense that can coexist peacefully with and promote science. It has a long tradition in both the West and China. In order to prevent another ‘He Jiankui event',we should work along two lines: on the one hand, we should establish and improve the rules and regulations under discussion; on the other hand, we should lay the appropriate metaphysical foundations for those rules and regulations.
There are many reasonable points in current genetic ethics and bioethics, which include restrictions on the application of gene editing technology and the prohibition of the enhancive gene editing.However, in terms of the use and study of germline gene editing, current genetic ethics have only issued a warning rather than any prohibition; they even give it encouragement in the general direction. This has to be considered as a serious inadequacy or defect of current genetic ethics. For all of this, it is necessary to introduce the ‘principle of prohibiting germline gene editing'. This kind of principle of genetic ethics is based on natural religion and anthropocentrism, which can be regarded as its metaphysical foundations, with the purpose of keeping the human gene pool as pure as possible. Natural religion is a religion in the broad sense that can coexist peacefully with and promote science. It has a long tradition in both the West and China. In order to prevent another ‘He Jiankui event',we should work along two lines: on the one hand, we should establish and improve the rules and regulations under discussion; on the other hand, we should lay the appropriate metaphysical foundations for those rules and regulations.
引文
[1]科学技术部、卫生部.人胚胎干细胞研究伦理指导原则[OL],中华人民共和国科学技术部网,http://www.most.gov.cn/fggw/zfwj/zfwj2003/200512/t20051214_54948.htm.2003-12-24.
[2]'Statement from the Organizing Committee on Reported Human Embryo Genome Editing'[EB/OL].Second International Summit on Human Genome Editing,http://www8.nationalacademies.org/onpinews/newsitem.aspx?RecordID=11262018.2018-11-26.
[3]Regalado,A.'Rogue Chinese CRISPR Scientist Cited USReport as His Green Light'[EB/OL],MIT Technology Review,https://www.technologyreview.com/s/612472/rogue-chinese-crispr-scientist-cited-us-report-as-hisgreen-light/.2018-11-27.
[4]'Statement by the Organizing Committee of the Second International Summit on Human Genome Editing[EB/OL].Second International Summit on Human Genome Editing,http://www8.nationalacademies.org/onpinews/newsitem.aspx?recordid=11282018b&_g a=2.2 3 7 6 5 4 1 4 4.1 0 9 5 5 2 1 7 9 9.1 5 4 7 9 7 6 8 9 4-1509153457.1547976894.2018-11-29.
[5]贺建奎香港18分钟演讲和问答全文[OL],界面新闻,https://www.jiemian.com/article/2660685_qq.html.2018-11-28.
[6]'On Human Gene Editing:International Summit Statement'[EB/OL],中国科学院网,http://m.cas.cn/gfzjz/201512/t20151204_4487613.html.2015-12-04
[7]段伟文.同样搞基因编辑,贺建奎、黄军就何以评价两极化[OL],华夏经纬网,http://www.huaxia.com/xw/xjbzq/2018/11/5957119.html.2018-11-29.
[8]贺建奎最新回应:坚信伦理将站在我们一边[OL],新浪网,https://tech.sina.com.cn/d/2018-11-26/doc-ihmutuec3874537.shtml.2018-11-26
[9]翟晓梅、雷瑞鹏、朱伟、邱仁宗.'Chinese Bioethicists Respond to the Case of He iankui'[OL].The Hastings Center,https://www.thehastingscenter.org/chinesebioethicists-respond-case-jiankui/.2019-02-05.
[10]邱仁宗.基因编辑技术的研究和应用:伦理学的视角[J].医学与哲学,2016,37(7A):1-7.
[11]Tatlow,D.K.'A Scientific Ethical Divide between China and the West'[N],New York Times,2015-6-29.
[12]Zhai,X.M.,Vincent,N.G.,Reidar,L.'No Ethical Divide between China and the West in Human Embryo Research'[J].Developing World Bioethics,2016,16(2):116-120.
[13]牛顿.自然哲学的数学原理[M].赵振江译,北京:商务印书馆,2006,351.
[14]塞耶.牛顿自然哲学著作选[M].上海自然科学哲学编译组译,上海:上海人民出版社,1974,63.
[15]爱因斯坦.爱因斯坦文集第一卷[M].许良英、范岱年译,北京:商务印书馆,1976,283.
[16]张华夏.现代科学与伦理世界[M].长沙:湖南教育出版社,1999,202-203.
[17]冯友兰.中国哲学简史[M].涂又光译,北京:北京大学出版社,1985.
(1)文献[9]的作者是翟晓梅、雷瑞鹏、朱伟、邱仁宗,他们对于禁止一切生殖系基因编辑的观点表示反对,认为只应拒绝增强性的生殖系基因编辑,而应接受治疗性的生殖系基因编辑;否则就是“把洗澡水连同婴儿一起倒掉。”不过,该文承认:“我们无法断然地拒绝增强性的生殖系基因编辑,如果它有医学上的理由。但是比起治疗性的生殖系基因编辑,在此类情况下我们应当尤为谨慎。”有趣的是,在该文后面紧跟一条英文评论,指出该文作者在写出上面这句话时有所混淆,谈道:“贺博士的编辑是治疗性的。这里的关键问题不是对增强性与治疗性的区分,而是这种基因编辑对治疗疾病是否唯一的方法,或是最好的方法。既然精子可以通过清洗而避免艾滋病感染,为什么贺博士需要编辑胚胎而不顾所有的潜在风险呢?”笔者以为,这个评论是实质性的,遗憾的是,该文作者没有对此评论给以回答。
(2)正当本文等待本杂志发表之际,文献[9]的四位作者(雷瑞鹏、翟晓梅、朱伟、邱仁宗)又在美国《自然》杂志2019年5月号(NATURE,VOL569)发表文章,题为:“Reboot Ethics Governance in China”。此文虽然提及贺建奎事件,但并未深入探讨其中的伦理问题,而是着重指出此事件所暴露出的中国科学界普遍存在的急功近利的不良风气,以及中国政府有关部门在科学管理方面存在的问题,并提出有关科学伦理监督与科学伦理教育的建议和措施。由于其论题与本文相去甚远,故以下讨论不涉及该文。
(1)从邱仁宗等四人在《自然》杂志(前面注脚中提到)发表的那篇文章可以看到,他们的观点已经发生明显改变,承认中国政府有关机构在科学伦理的管理上存在很大问题,中国科学家的伦理学素养也是比较欠缺的。这意味着,他们对《纽约时报》那篇文章的观点有所靠拢或接纳。
(1)关于现行基因伦理的有关规定或主张可参阅邱仁宗文章
(1)首先提出“系统功利主义”这一概念的是中山大学张华夏教授。
[2]'Statement from the Organizing Committee on Reported Human Embryo Genome Editing'[EB/OL].Second International Summit on Human Genome Editing,http://www8.nationalacademies.org/onpinews/newsitem.aspx?RecordID=11262018.2018-11-26.
[3]Regalado,A.'Rogue Chinese CRISPR Scientist Cited USReport as His Green Light'[EB/OL],MIT Technology Review,https://www.technologyreview.com/s/612472/rogue-chinese-crispr-scientist-cited-us-report-as-hisgreen-light/.2018-11-27.
[4]'Statement by the Organizing Committee of the Second International Summit on Human Genome Editing[EB/OL].Second International Summit on Human Genome Editing,http://www8.nationalacademies.org/onpinews/newsitem.aspx?recordid=11282018b&_g a=2.2 3 7 6 5 4 1 4 4.1 0 9 5 5 2 1 7 9 9.1 5 4 7 9 7 6 8 9 4-1509153457.1547976894.2018-11-29.
[5]贺建奎香港18分钟演讲和问答全文[OL],界面新闻,https://www.jiemian.com/article/2660685_qq.html.2018-11-28.
[6]'On Human Gene Editing:International Summit Statement'[EB/OL],中国科学院网,http://m.cas.cn/gfzjz/201512/t20151204_4487613.html.2015-12-04
[7]段伟文.同样搞基因编辑,贺建奎、黄军就何以评价两极化[OL],华夏经纬网,http://www.huaxia.com/xw/xjbzq/2018/11/5957119.html.2018-11-29.
[8]贺建奎最新回应:坚信伦理将站在我们一边[OL],新浪网,https://tech.sina.com.cn/d/2018-11-26/doc-ihmutuec3874537.shtml.2018-11-26
[9]翟晓梅、雷瑞鹏、朱伟、邱仁宗.'Chinese Bioethicists Respond to the Case of He iankui'[OL].The Hastings Center,https://www.thehastingscenter.org/chinesebioethicists-respond-case-jiankui/.2019-02-05.
[10]邱仁宗.基因编辑技术的研究和应用:伦理学的视角[J].医学与哲学,2016,37(7A):1-7.
[11]Tatlow,D.K.'A Scientific Ethical Divide between China and the West'[N],New York Times,2015-6-29.
[12]Zhai,X.M.,Vincent,N.G.,Reidar,L.'No Ethical Divide between China and the West in Human Embryo Research'[J].Developing World Bioethics,2016,16(2):116-120.
[13]牛顿.自然哲学的数学原理[M].赵振江译,北京:商务印书馆,2006,351.
[14]塞耶.牛顿自然哲学著作选[M].上海自然科学哲学编译组译,上海:上海人民出版社,1974,63.
[15]爱因斯坦.爱因斯坦文集第一卷[M].许良英、范岱年译,北京:商务印书馆,1976,283.
[16]张华夏.现代科学与伦理世界[M].长沙:湖南教育出版社,1999,202-203.
[17]冯友兰.中国哲学简史[M].涂又光译,北京:北京大学出版社,1985.
(1)文献[9]的作者是翟晓梅、雷瑞鹏、朱伟、邱仁宗,他们对于禁止一切生殖系基因编辑的观点表示反对,认为只应拒绝增强性的生殖系基因编辑,而应接受治疗性的生殖系基因编辑;否则就是“把洗澡水连同婴儿一起倒掉。”不过,该文承认:“我们无法断然地拒绝增强性的生殖系基因编辑,如果它有医学上的理由。但是比起治疗性的生殖系基因编辑,在此类情况下我们应当尤为谨慎。”有趣的是,在该文后面紧跟一条英文评论,指出该文作者在写出上面这句话时有所混淆,谈道:“贺博士的编辑是治疗性的。这里的关键问题不是对增强性与治疗性的区分,而是这种基因编辑对治疗疾病是否唯一的方法,或是最好的方法。既然精子可以通过清洗而避免艾滋病感染,为什么贺博士需要编辑胚胎而不顾所有的潜在风险呢?”笔者以为,这个评论是实质性的,遗憾的是,该文作者没有对此评论给以回答。
(2)正当本文等待本杂志发表之际,文献[9]的四位作者(雷瑞鹏、翟晓梅、朱伟、邱仁宗)又在美国《自然》杂志2019年5月号(NATURE,VOL569)发表文章,题为:“Reboot Ethics Governance in China”。此文虽然提及贺建奎事件,但并未深入探讨其中的伦理问题,而是着重指出此事件所暴露出的中国科学界普遍存在的急功近利的不良风气,以及中国政府有关部门在科学管理方面存在的问题,并提出有关科学伦理监督与科学伦理教育的建议和措施。由于其论题与本文相去甚远,故以下讨论不涉及该文。
(1)从邱仁宗等四人在《自然》杂志(前面注脚中提到)发表的那篇文章可以看到,他们的观点已经发生明显改变,承认中国政府有关机构在科学伦理的管理上存在很大问题,中国科学家的伦理学素养也是比较欠缺的。这意味着,他们对《纽约时报》那篇文章的观点有所靠拢或接纳。
(1)关于现行基因伦理的有关规定或主张可参阅邱仁宗文章
(1)首先提出“系统功利主义”这一概念的是中山大学张华夏教授。