The 'far east' of biological ethics

Ethics of organ transplantation in Japan: an example of cultural transplantation in medicine

Since the passage of the Organ Transplant Law in October 1997, only nine persons declared dead by neurological criteria have donated their organs in Japan. This article is an attempt by Japanese anesthesiologists to introduce the cultural and moral justification of Japanese transplant practice to the international community.

International perceptions and approval of gene therapy

Gene therapy is in clinical trials in a number of countries, raising the question of whether different ethical standards can be justified in different countries. One key issue is how divergent are the perceptions and bioethical reasoning of peoples around the world. An International Bioethics Survey with 150 questions, including 35 open ones, was developed to look at how people think about diseases, life, nature, and selected issues of science and technology, biotechnology, genetic engineering, genetic screening, and gene therapy. The mail response survey was conducted in 1993 among the public in Australia, India, Israel, Japan, New Zealand, Russia, and Thailand, and the same written survey was conducted among university students in Australia, Hong Kong, India, Japan, New Zealand, The Philippines, Russia, Singapore, and Thailand. Similar questions were included in an international high school education bioethics survey among high school teachers in Australia, Japan, and New Zealand. Further international comparisons to the United States and Europe are made. About three-quarters of all samples supported personal use of gene therapy, with higher support for children's use of gene therapy. The diversity of views was generally similar within each country. The major reasons given were to save life and increase the quality of life. About 5-7% rejected gene therapy, considering it to be playing God, or unnatural. There was very little concern about eugenics (0.5-2%), and more respondents gave supportive reasons like "improving genes," especially in Thailand and India. Support for specific applications was significantly less for "improving physical characters," "improving intelligence," or "making people more ethical" than for curing diseases like cancer or diabetes, but there was little difference between inheritable or noninheritable gene therapy.

Perception of risks and benefits of in vitro fertilization, genetic engineering and biotechnology

The use of new biotechnology in medicine has become an everyday experience, but many people still express concern about biotechnology. Concerns are evoked particularly by the phrases genetic engineering and in vitro fertilization (IVF), and these concerns persist despite more than a decade of their use in medicine. Mailed nationwide opinion surveys on attitudes to biotechnology were conducted in Japan, among samples of the public (N = 551), high school biology teachers (N = 228), scientists (N = 555) and nurses (N = 301). People do see more benefits coming from science than harm when balanced against the risks. There were especially mixed perceptions of benefit and risk about IVF and genetic engineering, and a relatively high degree of worry compared to other developments of science and technology. A discussion of assisted reproductive technologies and surrogacy in Japan is also made. The opinions of people in Japan were compared to the results of previous surveys conducted in Japan, and international surveys conducted in Australia, China, Europe, New Zealand, U.K. and U.S.A. Japanese have a very high awareness of biotechnology, 97% saying that they had heard of the word. They also have a high level of awareness of IVF and genetic engineering. Genetic engineering was said to be a worthwhile research area for Japan by 76%, while 58% perceived research on IVF as being worthwhile, however 61% were worried about research on IVF or genetic engineering. Japanese expressed more concern about IVF and genetic engineering than New Zealanders. The major reason cited for rejection of genetic manipulation research in Japan and New Zealand was that it was seen as interfering with nature, playing God or as unethical. The emotions concerning these technologies are complex, and we should avoid using simplistic public opinion data as measures of public perceptions. The level of concern expressed by scientists and teachers in Japan suggest that public education "technology promotion campaigns" will not reduce concern about science and technology. Such concern should be valued as discretion that is basic to increasing the bioethical maturity of a society, rather than being feared.