Article info
PDFResearch ethics
Scientific responsibility for the dissemination and interpretation of genetic research: lessons from the “warrior gene” controversy
- Dr D Wensley, Bioethics Centre, Dunedin School of Medicine, PO Box 56, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand; dana.wensley{at}stonebow.otago.ac.nz
Citation
Scientific responsibility for the dissemination and interpretation of genetic research: lessons from the “warrior gene” controversy
Publication history
- Received October 18, 2006
- Revised July 8, 2007
- Accepted August 2, 2007
- First published May 29, 2008.
Online issue publication
April 27, 2016
Request permissions
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Copyright information
2008 BMJ Publishing Group Ltd and the Institute of Medical Ethics
Other content recommended for you
- Genetic influences on adult body mass index followed over 29 years and their effects on late-life mobility: a study of twin sisters
- Attitudes of healthcare professionals and parents regarding genetic testing for violent traits in childhood
- Neuropsychiatry of frontal lobe dysfunction in violent and criminal behaviour: a critical review
- Genes and environment in asthma: a study of 4 year old twins
- Monoamine oxidase inhibitory activity in tobacco smoke varies with tobacco type
- The genetics of tobacco use: methods, findings and policy implications
- Genetic influences in gastro-oesophageal reflux disease: a twin study
- Neurogenetic evidence in the courtroom: a randomised controlled trial with German judges
- Is chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS/ME) heritable in children, and if so, why does it matter?
- Correlations of impulsivity and aggressive behaviours among adolescents in Shanghai, China using bioecological model: cross-sectional data from Global Early Adolescent Study