Dr Owen Schaefer1
1Centre For Biomedical Ethics, Yong Loo Lin School Of Medicine, National University Of Singapore, Singapore
Biography:
Owen Schaefer is an Assistant Professor at the Centre for Biomedical Ethics, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore. He received his DPhil in Philosophy from Oxford University, and has completed fellowships at the National Institutes of Health’s Department of Bioethics and the Oxford Centre for Neuroethics. His primary interests lie in the ethics of developing novel biomedical technologies. He has written on big data, research ethics, AI ethics, gene editing, human enhancement, precision medicine, vaccine allocation, assisted reproduction and in vitro meat.
Abstract:
Polygenic risk scores (PRSs), which aggregate multiple genetic variants to make predictions of propensity towards certain traits or diseases, have emerged as an alternative to monogenic testing that is more fit-for-purpose given many traits are influenced by a plethora of different genes. While currently a number of medical applications of PRSs are under investigation, PRSs also open up the possibility of creating predictive genetic profiles for non-medical traits such as cognitive ability or appearance. These non-medical PRSs could in turn be used through embryonic selection to allow parents undergoing assisted reproduction to choose embryos with more desirable traits. Such applications may attract ethical scrutiny and controversy, but at present there is relatively little research on public attitudes towards these sorts of non-medical applications of PRSs.
In this talk, we will present findings from a survey of Singaporeans concerning their attitudes towards using a hypothetical PRS that predicts educational attainment for the purpose of embryo selection. This survey was conducted on a locally sample representative. Overall, the survey found Singaporeans were generally supportive and accepting of PRS (along with other interventions) for educational attainment, with support around 10% higher than that found in a similar US study.
We will further examine the extent to which attitudes towards hypothetical cases like in the present survey can and should inform current practice and policy. These results are relevant insofar as research and development of PRSs that could make the hypothetical a reality should in part reflect and be responsive to the values and priorities of populations in which the R&D is occurring, both as a matter of legitimacy and pragmatism.