Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Science and Society
  • Published:

Advice to governments: scientific give and take

Nature Reviews Genetics volume 3, pages 631–636 (2002)Cite this article

Abstract

Judging by the intensity of its media coverage, the uses and abuses of genetics are of great public concern worldwide. The application of genetics has the potential to exert multifarious influences on individuals, families and society. Governments rightly seek advice on how evolving genetic knowledge should influence public policy, and clearly, scientists should participate in this process. But how does the system work? Here, we compare our experiences of serving on governmental advisory committees, and explore the benefits and pitfalls of such an undertaking.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: The UK advisory framework around the Human Genetics Commission.

References

  1. Roche, P. A. & Annas, G. J. Protecting genetic privacy. Nature Rev. Genet. 2, 392–396 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. House of Commons Select Committee on Science and Technology. Report on the Scientific Advisory System [online], (cited 1/7/02), (2001).

  3. House of Commons Science and Technology Committee. The Government's Response to the Science and Technology Committee's Fourth Report, Session 2000–01, on the Scientific Advisory System [online], (cited 1/7/02), (2001).

  4. King, D. Scientific Advice and Policy Making: Implementation of Guidelines 2000 [online], (cited 1/7/02), (2001).

    Google Scholar 

  5. House of Lords Science and Technology Committee. Report on Science and Society [online], (cited 1/7/02), (2000).

  6. Department of Trade and Industry. Code of Practice for Scientific Advisory Committees [online], (cited 1/7/02), DTI publication URN 01/1495 (2001).

  7. Editorial. The Bioethics Council. The Gainesville Sun (W. Florida) (13 December 2001).

  8. Cabinet Office, Office of Science and Technology. The Advisory and Regulatory Framework for Biotechnology: Report from the Government's Review [online], (cited 1/7/02), (1999).

  9. Check, E. Panels' conflicting views cloud legal future of human cloning. Nature 415, 351–352 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Human Genetics Commission. 'Whose Hands on Your Genes?' consultation document 1999 [online], (cited 1/7/02), (1999)

  11. Human Genetics Commission. Inside information – balancing interests in the use of personal genetic data [online], (cited 1/7/02),

  12. Department of Health. Government Response to the Report from the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee: Genetics and Insurance [online], (cited 1/7/02), (2001).

  13. Knoppers, B. M. in HMS Beagle: The BioMedNet Magazine 118, [online] 18 January 2002

    Google Scholar 

  14. Shapiro, H. T. & Speers, M. A. Basic flaws in US human research protection must be addressed. Nature 415, 363 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Jones, S. Genetics in Medicine: Real Promises, Unreal Expectations [online], (cited 1/7/02), (2000).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Medical Research Council Human Genetics Unit, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh, EH4 2XU, UK

    Veronica van Heyningen

  2. Perlegen Sciences, Inc., 2021 Stierlin Court, Mountain View, 94043, California, USA

    David R. Cox

Authors
  1. Veronica van Heyningen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. David R. Cox
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Veronica van Heyningen.

Related links

Related links

DATABASES

OMIM

asthma

Creutzfeld–Jakob disease

diabetes

FURTHER INFORMATION

Agriculture, Environment and Biotechnology Commission

Ethical and Policy Issues in Research Involving Human Participants

Eubios

European Group on Ethics

Federal Advisory Committee Act

Food Standards Agency

Howard Hughes Medical Institute

HUGO

Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority

Human Genetics Commission

Human Reproductive Cloning Bill

HumGen

Medical Research Council

National Bioethics Advisory Commission

National Institutes of Health

Nuffield Council on Bioethics

President's Council on Bioethics

Science and Technology Committees

The Wellcome Trust

UNESCO

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

van Heyningen, V., Cox, D. Advice to governments: scientific give and take. Nat Rev Genet 3, 631–636 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg860

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg860

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing