Synthetic biology: a utilitarian perspective

I examine the positive and negative features of synthetic biology (‘SynBio’) from a utilitarian ethical perspective. The potential beneficial outcomes from SynBio in the context of medicine are substantial; however it is not presently possible to predict precise outcomes due to the nascent state of the field. Potential negative outcomes from SynBio also exist, including iatrogenesis and bioterrorism; however it is not yet possible to quantify these risks. I argue that the application of a ‘precautionary’ approach to SynBio is ethically fraught, as is the notion that SynBio-associated knowledge ought to be restricted. I conclude that utilitarians ought to support a broadly laissez-faire stance in respect of SynBio.

‘Complementary & alternative medicine’ (CAM): ethical and policy issues

Editorial for Bioethics 2016. 30:(2)

Brain matters…in social sciences

Here we offer a general introduction to cognitive neuroscience and provide examples relevant to psychology, healthcare and bioethics, law and criminology, information studies, of how brain studies have influenced, are influencing or show the potential to influence the social sciences. We argue that social scientists should read, and be enabled to understand, primary sources of evidence in cognitive neuroscience. We encourage cognitive neuroscientists to reflect upon the resonance that their work may have across the social sciences and to facilitate a mutually enriching interdisciplinary dialogue.