Article info
PDFResponse
Is the ‘serious’ factor in germline modification really relevant? A response to Kleiderman, Ravitsky and Knoppers
- Correspondence to Dr Iñigo De Miguel Beriain, Derecho Publico, UPV/EHU, Bilbao 48080, Spain; INIGO.DEMIGUELB{at}EHU.EUS
Citation
Is the ‘serious’ factor in germline modification really relevant? A response to Kleiderman, Ravitsky and Knoppers
Publication history
- Received August 2, 2019
- Accepted September 1, 2019
- First published October 17, 2019.
Online issue publication
February 07, 2020
Article Versions
- Previous version (17 October 2019).
- You are viewing the most recent version of this article.
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
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Other content recommended for you
- The ‘serious’ factor in germline modification
- Clinical applications of preimplantation genetic testing
- Preimplantation genetic testing
- Moral reasons to edit the human genome: picking up from the Nuffield report
- Birth defects surveillance after assisted reproductive technology in Beijing: a whole of population-based cohort study
- Preimplantation genetic testing for a chr14q32 microdeletion in a family with Kagami-Ogata syndrome and Temple syndrome
- Health professionals and human rights campaigners: different cultures, shared goals
- ‘Serious’ factor—a relevant starting point for further debate: a response
- Long-read sequencing and haplotype linkage analysis enabled preimplantation genetic testing for patients carrying pathogenic inversions
- What is it to practise good medical ethics? A Muslim's perspective