Article info
PDFCommentary
Commentary on Koplin and Wilkinson
- Correspondence to Dr David B Resnik; resnikd{at}niehs.nih.gov
Citation
Commentary on Koplin and Wilkinson
Publication history
- Received April 10, 2019
- Accepted May 5, 2019
- First published June 29, 2019.
Online issue publication
August 02, 2019
Article Versions
- Previous version (2 August 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)) 2019. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Other content recommended for you
- Moral uncertainty and the farming of human-pig chimeras
- The concise argument: consistency and moral uncertainty
- How should we treat human–pig chimeras, non-chimeric pigs and other beings of uncertain moral status?
- Harming animals for research and for food in conditions of moral uncertainty
- Ethical issues when modelling brain disorders innon-human primates
- Lessons from Frankenstein 200 years on: brain organoids, chimaeras and other ‘monsters’
- Animus: human-embodied animals
- Infanticide and moral consistency
- A qualified endorsement of embryonic stem cell research, based on two widely shared beliefs about the brain-diseased patients such research might benefit
- Implications of moral uncertainty: implausible or just unpalatable?