martes, 13 de junio de 2017

Powerful commercial interests are backing prenatal genetic screening | MercatorNet | June 14, 2017 |

Powerful commercial interests are backing prenatal genetic screening

| MercatorNet | June 14, 2017 |

Powerful commercial interests are backing prenatal genetic screening

How much will parents pay for the perfect baby or a baby of the right sex?
Philippa Taylor | Jun 13 2017 | comment 

The UK's Nuffield Council on Bioethics is warning that a new screening test for pregnant women, Non-Invasive Prenatal Screening (NIPT), which is due to be rolled out next year on the National Health Service, could lead to babies being aborted because they are the wrong gender or have other “undesirable” characteristics. Professor Tom Shakespeare, chair of the Nuffield Council on Bioethics working group on NIPT, on May 22 said that:
“Abortions on the basis of sex appear to be rare in Britain. However, this could change with a new DNA testing method that allows the baby’s sex to be revealed to prospective parents much earlier that the standard 18-20-week scan”.
Shakespeare is right to warn about this. The move to introduce NIPT into the NHS next year is backed by powerful vested and commercial interests. Behind the Government’s drive to introduce the tests – which would use millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money – there are some large biotechnology companies, and their shareholders, hungry for profits.
It does not take long to look through some of the long term aims of these companies to see that they go beyond screening “just” for Down’s, Patau’s and Edwards syndromes, despite what we are being assured now.
Take one example, Premaitha Health. Christian Medical Fellowship CEO Peter Saunders first highlighted their screening tests last year. In March 2015 the St George’s University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust revealed that it was joining forces with the British firm Premaitha Health to bring in this new screening test. Premaitha describes the test (marketed as “Iona”) as its “flagship product” and, along with its shareholders, it now stands to make a lot of money. Millions of pounds in fact, because each NIPT test costs between £400 and £900 pounds.
Premaitha has “absolutely no doubt that the developed world is moving” towards “widescale adoption of NIPT” and that it “is well placed to gain a large share of the market”.
Their share price has continued to increase as they have expanded into the Middle East and Asia. In their own words:
“Non-invasive prenatal screening is an emerging, multi-billion dollar global market and Premaitha’s complete CE marked system enables laboratories and health care practitioners to offer an approved, non-invasive prenatal screening system in-house.”
One of its biggest coups is surely that the “Benefits of NIPT [are] being recognised by Governments and countries moving towards making NIPT freely available through public health services.”
So we all, as taxpayers, will very soon be paying Premaitha for the NIPT tests.
The process of taxpayer involvement has already begun: “…During the year [2016] we saw public bodies starting to announce decisions to include NIPT in pregnancy screening pathways and we expect this trend to continue in the coming years.” No wonder they “…remain confident that ultimately all prenatal screening will include NIPT.”
So far, not surprising for a company based on shareholder profits. But then it becomes a bit more interesting. Not only do they expect NIPT to be used in all prenatal screening, the screening will not be limited to “just” Down’s:
“The IONA test is demonstrably fit for purpose in the NIPT screening field and to ensure this continues to be the case we have introduced a number of additional product and software features such as sex determination ….”
“…we have embarked on initial studies to identify opportunities to leverage our capabilities in the future in areas such as other prenatal conditions and in cancer detection.”
Tom Shakespeare, as part of his warning, said that we know some women are under strong pressure to give birth to boys, and may be subject to abuse if they give birth to a girl. If left unchecked, he said, use of this technique to determine sex could lead to an increase in sex-selective abortions here, and to Britain becoming a destination for them. The test also allows whole genome sequencing which is a serious thing. People are already paying thousands for school fees so it is not unreasonable they would pay to find out if their child will have genetic traits that would allow them to perform well.
Shakespeare believes that we’re not quite at this point yet, but we’re not far off, so he is calling for a moratorium to be put in place now before we get there to stop this sort of thing happening.
However, here I disagree. We are already at this point, because as I’ve quoted above, the tests are even now being promoted for their ability to screen for gender! And once they are rolled out for free, nationwide, by the NHS, there will be no rational – or practical – basis on which to prevent the tests from being used to screen for “other prenatal conditions.”
Shakespeare’s proposal for a moratorium is a start but the sad reality is that it will be impossible to either implement or hold. The only effective solution is for the government to not roll out the new test in the first place. There is still time to stop it. Premaitha shareholders might not like that but thousands of others would, not least those lives that will be most directly affected by the (usually unmentioned) consequences of these tests.
Philippa Taylor is Head of Public Policy at the Christian Medical Fellowship, in the UK. This article has been republished from the CMF blog.

“Now that you’re here …  we’ve got a small favour to ask. More people are reading MercatorNet, but far fewer are donating. Unlike many online magazine, we haven’t put up a paywall and we don't have lots of obtrusive advertising. So you can see why we need to ask for your help.
MercatorNet’s independent, vibrant and informative articles take a lot of time, money and hard work to produce. But we do it because we believe our views on human dignity matter – and because they might be your views as well.

If every fan of MercatorNet donated just $10, our future would be much more secure.
    Donate Now   
- See more at:


June 14, 2017

There’s a very sad and ugly courtroom drama taking place in Massachusetts at the moment. Twenty-year-old Michelle Carter is on trial for the involuntary manslaughter of Conrad Roy. Three years ago she egged him on to commit suicide with a barrage of bullying text messages. Finally he did, by filling his car with carbon monoxide.
The most extraordinary thing is that although they were “boyfriend” and “girlfriend”, they barely saw each other and communicated mainly with incessant text messaging. What kind of romantic relationship was that? Not just the heartless bullying but the substitution of technology for intimacy is appalling.
But on a less dramatic level, this happens every day with millions of Millennials. As Tony Rao points out in today’s lead article, social media addiction may have very negative effects upon their lives. “It may not cause physical harms, such as those caused by tobacco and alcohol, but it has the potential to cause long-term damage to our emotions, behaviour and relationships.”
It’s a very thought-provoking read. 

Michael Cook 

Weapons of mass distraction
By Tony Rao
Social media can be as damaging as drinking and drugs for Millennials
Read the full article
When gender is in question, Mx is the best match
By Peter C. DeMarco
It allows respectful ambiguity on both sides.
Read the full article
Powerful commercial interests are backing prenatal genetic screening
By Philippa Taylor
How much will parents pay for the perfect baby or a baby of the right sex?
Read the full article
Children’s books nobody can afford to miss
By Susan Reibel Moore
After their mother abandons them, four children journey on foot to their grandmother's home.
Read the full article
Don’t push population control on Africa
By Shannon Roberts
The continent needs employment, not pills.
Read the full article
If you don’t like the message, you can always shoot the messenger
By Michelle A. Cretella
Opposing sex changes for children can get you into hot water
Read the full article
Millennials are looking for parental guidance on love
By Kat Talalas
In a changing world they need more help from older generations.
Read the full article
In Japan, even the ninjas are disappearing!
By Marcus Roberts
And it's not because it's part of their job description.
Read the full article
Anti-Christian? A different reading of The Handmaid’s Tale
By Josh Nadeau
A closer look shows that things are not so simple in Gilead.
Read the full article
Why God (very probably) exists
By Robert H. Nelson
An economist's Five Ways of thinking rationally about God.
Read the full article
Between idealism and self-interest: the vital role of incompetence in modern democracy
By Dylan Pahman
Is political incompetence our fatal flaw or saving grace?
Read the full article

MERCATORNET | New Media Foundation 

Suite 12A, Level 2, 5 George Street, North Strathfied NSW 2137, Australia 

Designed by elleston

Powerful commercial interests are backing prenatal genetic screening

No hay comentarios:

Publicar un comentario