Epigenetic exceptionalism

Researcher views on returning results from multi-omics data to research participants: insights from The Molecular Transducers of Physical Activity Consortium (MoTrPAC) Study

BACKGROUND

There is growing consensus in favor of returning individual specific research results that are clinically actionable, valid, and reliable. However, deciding what and how research results should be returned remains a challenge. Researchers are key stakeholders in return of results decision-making and implementation. Multi-omics data contains medically relevant findings that could be considered for return. We sought to understand researchers' views regarding the potential for return of results for multi-omics data from a large, national consortium generating multi-omics data.

METHODS

Researchers from the Molecular Transducers of Physical Activity Consortium (MoTrPAC) were recruited for in-depth semi-structured interviews. To assess understanding of potential clinical utility for types of data collected and attitudes towards return of results in multi-omic clinical studies, we devised an interview guide focusing on types of results generated in the study for hypothetical return based on review of the literature and professional expertise of team members. The semi-structured interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim and co-coded. Thematic trends were identified for reporting.

RESULTS

We interviewed a total of 16 individuals representative of 11 sites and 6 research roles across MoTrPAC. Many respondents expressed positive attitudes regarding hypothetical multi-omics results return, citing participant rights to their data and perception of minimal harm. Ethical and logistical concerns around the return of multi-omics results were raised, and they often mirrored those in the published literature for genomic return of results including: uncertain clinical validity, a lack of expertise to communicate results, and an unclear obligation regarding whether to return multi-omics results. With the exception of privacy concerns, respondents were able to give examples within multi-omics of how each point was relevant. Further, researchers called for more guidance from funding agencies and increased researcher education regarding return of results.

CONCLUSION

Overall, researchers expressed positive attitudes toward multi-omic return of results in principle, particularly if medically actionable. However, competing ethical considerations, logistical constraints, and need for more external guidance were raised as key implementation concerns. Future studies should consider views and experiences of other relevant stakeholders, specifically clinical genomics professionals and study participants, regarding the clinical utility of multi-omics information and multi-omics results return.

Distinctive But Not Exceptional: The Risks of Psychedelic Ethical Exceptionalism

When used clinically, psychedelics may appear unusual or even unique when compared to more familiar or long-standing medical interventions, prompting some to suggest that the ethical issues raised may likewise be exceptional. If that is correct, then perhaps psychedelics should be treated differently from other medical substances: for example, by being subjected to different ethical or evidentiary standards. Alternatively, it may be that psychedelics have more in common with various existing medical interventions than first meets the eye. We argue in favor of the latter position, drawing on parallels from earlier debates around genetic exceptionalism in bioethics. We suggest there are risks to adopting a stance of "psychedelic ethical exceptionalism," and propose that consistent ethical rules and evidentiary standards should be applied across all relevant areas of clinical medicine. Importantly, this does not preclude the possibility that changes to existing standards should be made; but if so, this should not be justified by appealing to the alleged uniqueness of psychedelics.

The ethical aspects of exposome research: a systematic review

In recent years, exposome research has been put forward as the next frontier for the study of human health and disease. Exposome research entails the analysis of the totality of environmental exposures and their corresponding biological responses within the human body. Increasingly, this is operationalized by big-data approaches to map the effects of internal as well as external exposures using smart sensors and multiomics technologies. However, the ethical implications of exposome research are still only rarely discussed in the literature. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review of the academic literature regarding both the exposome and underlying research fields and approaches, to map the ethical aspects that are relevant to exposome research. We identify five ethical themes that are prominent in ethics discussions: the goals of exposome research, its standards, its tools, how it relates to study participants, and the consequences of its products. Furthermore, we provide a number of general principles for how future ethics research can best make use of our comprehensive overview of the ethical aspects of exposome research. Lastly, we highlight three aspects of exposome research that are most in need of ethical reflection: the actionability of its findings, the epidemiological or clinical norms applicable to exposome research, and the meaning and action-implications of bias.

Epigenetics and DOHaD: how translation to predictive testing will require a better public understanding

Epigenetics is likely to play a role in the mediation of the effects of genes and environment in risk for many non-communicable diseases (NCDs). The Developmental Origins of Health and Disease (DOHaD) theory presents unique opportunities regarding the possibility of early life interventions to alter the epigenetic makeup of an individual, thereby modifying their risk for a variety of NCDs. While it is important to determine how we can lower the risk of these NCDs, it is equally important to understand how the public's knowledge and opinion of DOHaD and epigenetic concepts may influence their willingness to undertake such interventions for themselves and their children. In this review, we provide an overview of epigenetics, DOHaD, NCDs, and the links between them. We explore the issues surrounding using epigenetics to identify those at increased risk of NCDs, including the concept of predictive testing of children. We also outline what is currently understood about the public's understanding and opinion of epigenetics, DOHaD, and their relation to NCDs. In doing so, we demonstrate that it is essential that future research explores the public's awareness and understanding of epigenetics and epigenetic concepts. This will provide much-needed information which will prepare health professionals for the introduction of epigenetic testing into future healthcare.

The end of the 'Bad seed' Era? Epigenetics' contribution to violence prevention initiatives in public health

Despite numerous initiatives and significant resource investment, violence remains a pervasive threat to public health. The burgeoning field of epigenetics may offer an exciting new possibility for violence prevention efforts by illuminating the mechanisms of gene-environment interactions. In particular, it may improve our ability to design more effective primary interventions, facilitate improved intervention tailoring, and better position communities to be active agents in their well-being. However, without attention to the distinction between awareness, self-efficacy, and agency, it risks encouraging a false sense of individual accountability for violence, a perception that may perpetuate or increase existing inequities. Thus, embracing epigenetic insights in public health raises new opportunities but also new concerns. Ultimately, I argue public health should embrace epigenetics' potential, but only with an equal commitment to state responsibility and systemic justice.

Looking Beyond GINA: Policy Approaches to Address Genetic Discrimination

Concerns about genetic discrimination (GD) often surface when discussing research and innovation in genetics. Over recent decades, countries around the world have attempted to address GD using various policy measures. In this article, we survey these approaches and provide a critical commentary on their advantages and disadvantages. Our examination begins with regions featuring extensive policy-making activities (North America and Europe), followed by regions with moderate policy-making activities (Australia, Asia, and South America) and regions with minimal policy-making activities (the Middle East and Africa). Our analysis then turns to emerging issues regarding genetic testing and GD, including the expansion of multiomics sciences and direct-to-consumer genetic tests outside the health context. We additionally survey the shortcomings of current normative approaches addressing GD. Finally, we conclude by highlighting the evolving nature of GD and the need for more innovative policy-making in this area.

Epigenetics, ethics, law and society: A multidisciplinary review of descriptive, instrumental, dialectical and reflexive analyses

Epigenetics, defined as 'the study of mitotically and/or meiotically heritable changes in gene function that cannot be explained by changes in DNA sequence', has emerged as a promissory yet controversial field of scientific inquiry over the past decade. Scholars from many disciplines have formulated both optimistic and cautionary claims regarding its potential normative implications. This article provides a comprehensive review of the nascent literature at the crossroads of epigenetics, ethics, law and society. It describes nine emerging areas of discussion, relating to (1) the impact of epigenetics on the nature versus nurture dualism, (2) the potential resulting biologization of the social, (3) the meaning of epigenetics for public health, its potential influence on (4) reproduction and parenting, (5) political theory and (6) legal proceedings, and concerns regarding (7) stigmatization and discrimination, (8) privacy protection and (9) knowledge translation. While there is some degree of similarity between the nature and content of these areas and the abundant literature on ethical, legal and social issues in genetics, the potential implications of epigenetics ought not be conflated with the latter. Critical studies on epigenetics are emerging within a separate space of bioethical and biopolitical investigations and claims, with scholars from various epistemological standpoints utilizing distinct yet complementary analytical approaches.

Points-to-consider on the return of results in epigenetic research

As epigenetic studies become more common and lead to new insights into health and disease, the return of individual epigenetic results to research participants, in particular in large-scale epigenomic studies, will be of growing importance. Members of the International Human Epigenome Consortium (IHEC) Bioethics Workgroup considered the potential ethical, legal, and social issues (ELSI) involved in returning epigenetic research results and incidental findings in order to produce a set of 'Points-to-consider' (P-t-C) for the epigenetics research community. These P-t-C draw on existing guidance on the return of genetic research results, while also integrating the IHEC Bioethics Workgroup's ELSI research on and discussion of the issues associated with epigenetic data as well as the experience of a return of results pilot study by the Personal Genome Project UK (PGP-UK). Major challenges include how to determine the clinical validity and actionability of epigenetic results, and considerations related to environmental exposures and epigenetic marks, including circumstances warranting the sharing of results with family members and third parties. Interdisciplinary collaboration and good public communication regarding epigenetic risk will be important to advance the return of results framework for epigenetic science.

Epigenetics: ethics, politics, biosociality

BACKGROUND

Epigenetics is a burgeoning field of contemporary biosciences, which has attracted a lot of interest both in biomedical and in social sciences.

SOURCES OF DATA

Unsystematic literature analysis and retrospective mapping of highly cited work (source: Web of Science core collection) in the social sciences and humanities engaging with epigenetics.

AREAS OF AGREEMENT

Epigenetics poses no new ethical issue over and above those discussed in relation to genetics.

AREAS OF CONTROVERSY

However, it encourages a different framing and reflexivity on some of the commonly held categories in the moral uptake of scientific discoveries.

GROWING POINTS

Epigenetics presents us with normative questions that touch upon privacy, responsibility for individual health and for the well-being of future generations, as well as matters of health justice and equality of opportunities.

AREAS TIMELY FOR DEVELOPING RESEARCH

Epigenetic thinking could help us adjust and refine the problem frames and categories that inform our ethical and political questions with a complex biosocial description of situations, of persons or actions.

Epigenetic Discrimination: Emerging Applications of Epigenetics Pointing to the Limitations of Policies Against Genetic Discrimination

Over more than two decades, various policies have been adopted worldwide to restrict the use of individual genetic information for non-medical reasons by third parties and prevent ‘genetic discrimination’. In this paper, we bring attention to the growing interest for individual epigenetic information by insurers and forensic scientists. We question whether such interest could lead to ‘epigenetic discrimination’ – the differential adverse treatment or abusive profiling of individuals or groups based on their actual or presumed epigenetic characteristics – and argue that we might already be facing the limitations of recently adopted normative approaches against genetic discrimination. First, we highlight some similarities and differences between genetic and epigenetic modifications, and stress potential challenges to regulating epigenetic discrimination. Second, we argue that most existing normative approaches against genetic discrimination fall short in providing oversight into the field of epigenetics. We conclude with a call for discussion on the issue, and the development of comprehensive and forward-looking preventive strategies against epigenetic discrimination.

Race in an epigenetic time: thinking biology in the plural

The notion that biological memories of environmental experiences can be embedded in the human genome and even transmitted transgenerationally is increasingly relevant in the postgenomic world, particularly in molecular epigenetics, where the genome is conceptualized as porous to environmental signals. In this article I discuss the current rethinking of race in epigenetic rather than genetic terms, emphasizing some of its paradoxical implications, especially for public policy. I claim in particular that: (i) if sociologists want to investigate race in a postgenomic world they should pay more attention to this novel plastic and biosocial view of race; and (ii) there are no reasons to believe that an epigenetic view will extinguish race, or that soft-inheritance claims will produce a less exclusionary discourse than genetics (hard heredity). Quite the opposite, the ground for a re-racialization of social debates and the reinforcement of biological boundaries between groups are highlighted in the article.

Epigenetics Changes Nothing: What a New Scientific Field Does and Does Not Mean for Ethics and Social Justice

Recently, ethicists have posited that consideration of epigenetic mechanisms presents novel challenges to concepts of justice and equality of opportunity, such as elevating the importance of environments in bioethics and providing a counterpoint to gross genetic determinism. We argue that new findings in epigenetic sciences, including those regarding intergenerational health effects, do not necessitate reconceptualization of theories of justice or the environment. To the contrary, such claims reflect a flawed understanding of epigenetics and its relation to genetics that may unintentionally undermine appeals to social justice. We provide a brief summary of epigenetic sciences, focusing on phenomena central to the current ethical discourse. We identify three fallacious modes of reasoning arising from the emergent literature on the ethical and policy implications of epigenetics, including mischaracterization, undue extrapolation, and exceptionalism. We end by discussing how these issues may work against mobilizing health equity policies and present a more modest claim regarding the value of new epigenetic knowledge to health justice by setting this discourse within the context of known themes in biomedical ethics and health policy.

Transgenerational epigenetics and environmental justice

Human transmission to offspring and future generations of acquired epigenetic modifications has not been definitively established, although there are several environmental exposures with suggestive evidence. This article uses three examples of hazardous substances with greater exposures in vulnerable populations: pesticides, lead, and diesel exhaust. It then considers whether, if there were scientific evidence of transgenerational epigenetic inheritance, there would be greater attention given to concerns about environmental justice in environmental laws, regulations, and policies at all levels of government. To provide a broader perspective on environmental justice the article discusses two of the most commonly cited approaches to environmental justice. John Rawls's theory of justice as fairness, a form of egalitarianism, is frequently invoked for the principle that differential treatment of individuals is justified only if actions are designed to benefit those with the greatest need. Another theory, the capabilities approach of Amartya Sen and Martha Nussbaum, focuses on whether essential capabilities of society, such as life and health, are made available to all individuals. In applying principles of environmental justice the article considers whether there is a heightened societal obligation to protect the most vulnerable individuals from hazardous exposures that could adversely affect their offspring through epigenetic mechanisms. It concludes that unless there were compelling evidence of transgenerational epigenetic harms, it is unlikely that there would be a significant impetus to adopt new policies to prevent epigenetic harms by invoking principles of environmental justice.

Epigenetics, Media Coverage, and Parent Responsibilities in the Post-Genomic Era

Environmental epigenetics is the study of how exposures and experiences can turn genes "on" or "off" without changing DNA sequence. By examining the influence that environmental conditions including diet, stress, trauma, toxins, and care can have on gene expression, this science suggests molecular connections between the environment, genetics, and how acquired characteristics may be inherited across generations. The rapid expansion of research in this area has attracted growing media attention. This coverage has implications for how parents and prospective parents understand health and their perceived responsibilities for children's wellbeing. This review provides insight into epigenetic research, its coverage in the media, and the social and ethical implications of this science for patients and clinicians. As epigenetic findings continue to elucidate the complex relationships between nature and nurture, it becomes critical to examine how representations of this science may influence patient experiences of risk and responsibility. This review describes some of the social and ethical implications of epigenetic research today.

The ambiguous nature of epigenetic responsibility

Over the past decade, epigenetic studies have been providing further evidence of the molecular interplay between gene expression and its health outcomes on one hand, and the physical and social environments in which individuals are conceived, born and live on the other. As knowledge of epigenetic programming expands, a growing body of literature in social sciences and humanities is exploring the implications of this new field of study for contemporary societies. Epigenetics has been mobilised to support political claims, for instance, with regard to collective obligations to address socio-environmental determinants of health. The idea of a moral 'epigenetic responsibility' has been proposed, meaning that individuals and/or governments should be accountable for the epigenetic programming of children and/or citizens. However, these discussions have largely overlooked important biological nuances and ambiguities inherent in the field of epigenetics. In this paper, we argue that the identification and assignment of moral epigenetic responsibilities should reflect the rich diversity and complexity of epigenetic mechanisms, and not rely solely on a gross comparison between epigenetics and genetics. More specifically, we explore how further investigation of the ambiguous notions of epigenetic normality and epigenetic plasticity should play a role in shaping this emerging debate.

Epigenetics and Child Psychiatry: Ethical and Legal Issues

Epigenetics has the potential to revolutionize diagnosis and treatment in psychiatry, especially child psychiatry, as it may offer the opportunity for early detection and prevention, as well as development of new treatments. As with the previous introduction of genetic research in psychiatry, there is also the problem of unrealistic expectations and new legal and ethical problems. This article reviews the potential contributions and problems of epigenetic research in child psychiatry. Previous legal and ethical issues in genetic research serve as a guide to those in epigenetic research. Recommendations for safeguards and guidelines on the use of epigenetics with children and adolescents are outlined based on the identified issues.

Epigenome data release: a participant-centered approach to privacy protection

Large-scale epigenome mapping by the NIH Roadmap Epigenomics Project, the ENCODE Consortium and the International Human Epigenome Consortium (IHEC) produces genome-wide DNA methylation data at one base-pair resolution. We examine how such data can be made open-access while balancing appropriate interpretation and genomic privacy. We propose guidelines for data release that both reduce ambiguity in the interpretation of open-access data and limit immediate access to genetic variation data that are made available through controlled access.

Emerging issues in public health genomics

This review highlights emerging areas of interest in public health genomics. First, we describe recent advances in newborn screening (NBS), with a focus on the practice and policy implications of current and future efforts to expand NBS programs (e.g., via next-generation sequencing). Next, we detail research findings from the rapidly progressing field of epigenetics and epigenomics, highlighting ways in which our emerging understanding in these areas could guide future intervention and research efforts in public health. We close by considering various ethical, legal, and social issues posed by recent developments in public health genomics; these include policies to regulate access to personal genomic information, the need to enhance genetic literacy in both health professionals and the public, and challenges in ensuring that the benefits (and burdens) of genomic discoveries and applications are equitably distributed. We also note needs for future genomic research that integrates across basic and social sciences.