Preventive Human Genome Editing and Enhancement: Candidate Criteria for Governance

Q: What does this research mean for the field?

Three conceptual tools for governance can help policy-makers navigate the regulatory challenges of human genome editing research that blurs the line between preventive goals and human enhancement. Novelty: ClaimNovelty.METHODOLOGICAL. Consensus alignment: ConsensusAlignment.NEUTRAL.

R.J. Cadigan; R. L. Walker; J.M. Conley; G.E. Henderson; R. Major; M.A. Flatt; E. Juengst; A. Davis; D. MacKay

doi:10.17615/scyc-ph67

September 2, 2026Open Access

Preventive Human Genome Editing and Enhancement: Candidate Criteria for Governance

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Share

Key Points

Identify candidate governance criteria to help policymakers address the ethical and regulatory tension between preventive human genome editing and physical enhancement.
Conceptual policy analysis evaluating human functional capacity thresholds and regulatory hurdles facing genome editing.
Formulation of three distinct governance tools to guide oversight at the boundary between disease prevention and enhancement.
Identifies that genome modifications extending resilience beyond normal functional ranges risk classification as enhancement, introducing major barriers to research approval.
Proposes three conceptual governance tools to enable regulators to evaluate preventive intent independently from enhancement concerns.

Ask about this paper

Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.

Implication

Policy analysis uncovers candidate governance criteria for human genome editing, highlighting conceptual tools to differentiate preventive medicine from enhancement.

Abstract

Human genome editing research that aims to strengthen individuals’ physical resilience beyond what is considered the human functional range risks being interpreted as pursuing human enhancement. If this occurs, the research may face strong obstacles to approval. Three conceptual tools for governance of such research could help policy-makers navigate the interface between preventive goals and enhancement implications.

Discussion

No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.

Cite This Study

Cadigan et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a9a861f5d9e33f25c631ab4 https://doi.org/10.17615/scyc-ph67

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Share

Preventive Human Genome Editing and Enhancement: Candidate Criteria for Governance

Key Points

Ask about this paper

Implication

Abstract

Discussion

Cite This Study

Preventive Human Genome Editing and Enhancement: Candidate Criteria for Governance

Key Points

Ask about this paper

Implication

Abstract

Discussion

Cite This Study

Keep reading

Keep reading