Potential Inequities in New Medical Technologies
By Eric B. Kmiec and Jonathan Marron,
Scientific American
| 03. 28. 2020
As headline-catching new technologies emerge—like tools to “edit” our DNA—researchers, doctors, patients and the general public are excited about the future of medicine and the research that informs its practice. For some, there are obvious and critical conversations taking place about the ethics of this research, including how we do it (think “CRISPR babies” in China) and the potential for edits (intentional or otherwise) that could be passed on to future generations.
These conversations are important, but they can overshadow another equally important question. Will all patients have equal access to these new technologies?
That question requires us to look back at the blemished history of medical research and health care that has resulted in some patients—based on their race, gender, income and other factors—having poorer access to health care and poorer health in general. In some cases, this is because the system neglected them. In others, because the system blatantly abused them. The question we must ask is: Will new treatments continue or even worsen deeply rooted disparities? Or will we lay the groundwork for future treatments that...
Related Articles
By Alondra Nelson, Science | 09.11.2025
In the United States, the summer of 2025 will be remembered as artificial intelligence’s (AI’s) cruel summer—a season when the unheeded risks and dangers of AI became undeniably clear. Recent months have made visible the stakes of the unchecked use...
By Emma McDonald Kennedy
| 09.25.2025
In the leadup to the 2024 election, Donald Trump repeatedly promised to make IVF more accessible. He made the commitment central to his campaign, even referring to himself as the “father of IVF.” In his first month in office, Trump issued an executive order promising to expand IVF access. The order set a 90-day deadline for policy recommendations for “lowering costs and reducing barriers to IVF,” although it didn’t make any substantive reproductive healthcare policy changes.
The response to the...
Sir Francis Galton, 1890s, by Eveleen Myers (née Tennant)
http://www.npg.org.uk/collections/search/portrait/mw127193
Public Domain via Wikipedia
As has been discussed in recent issues of Biopolitical Times (1, 2), there are, increasingly, companies that claim to be selling parents better babies by selecting the “best” embryos. These services don’t come cheap – think $50,000, or even more, for embryo testing, plus perhaps as much again for IVF and concomitant services. To most of us, that is extremely expensive...
By Johana Bhuiyan, The Guardian | 09.23.2025
In March 2021, a 25-year-old US citizen was traveling through Chicago’s Midway airport when they were stopped by US border patrol agents. Though charged with no crime, the 25-year-old was subjected to a cheek swab to collect their DNA, which...