Crossing Over
Genomics in the Public Arena
Edna Einsiedel & Frank Timmermans, eds.
© 2005 by Edna Einsiedel & Frank Timmermans.
Published by the University of Calgary Press
2500 University Drive NW
Calgary, Alberta, Canada T2N N4
www.uofcpress.com
No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted, in any form or by any means,
without the prior written consent of the publisher or a licence from The Canadian Copyright Licensing Agency (Access
Copyright). For an Access Copyright licence, visit www.accesscopyright.ca or call toll free to 1-800-893-5777.
We acknowledge the financial support of the Government of Canada through the Book Publishing Industry Development
Program (BPIDP), the Alberta Foundation for the Arts and the Alberta Lottery Fund—Community Initiatives Program for
our publishing activities. We acknowledge the support of the Canada Council for the Arts for our publishing program.
LIBRARY AND ARCHIVES OF CANADA CATALOGUING IN PUBLICATION:
Crossing over : genomics in the public arena / edited by Edna Einsiedel & Frank Timmermans.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
I SBN 1-23 456 -7 8 9 - 0
1 Subject.
2 Subject.
3 Subject.
4 Subject.
I Object.
PS1234.5.A6W78 2005
C123’.12345678901
C2005-123456-7
Cover design, Mieka West.
Internal design & typesetting, Jason Dewinetz.
This book is printed on paper description here.
Printed and bound in Canada by PRINTER HERE.
Contents
Introduction 1
Edna Einsiedel
Part 1
THE FINANCIAL PIPELINE
1 The challenge of creating, protecting & exploiting networked knowledge 7
Peter W. B. Phillips
2 From bank to bench to pharmacy shelf: Biotechnology and the culture of finance 33
Usher Fleising & Charles Mather
Part 2
POLICIES AND PUBLICS
3 Agricultural biotechnology in Europe at the crossroads 49
Helge Torgersen
4 Angles of vision: Stakeholders & human embryonic stem cell policy development 61
Robin Downey, Rose Geransar, & Edna Einsiedel
Part 3
FROM PUBLIC PERCEPTION TO PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: CONSUMER CHOICE AND DECISIONMAKING
5 Involving communities : A matter of trust & communication 87
Béatrice Godard
6 Canadian attitudes to genetically modified food 99
Michelle Vee5man, Wiktor Adamowicz,
Wuyang Hu, & Anne Hünnemeyer
Part 4
FR AMING THE GENE: THE MEDIA SPHERE
7 Media representations of genetic research 117
Tania M. Bubela & Timothy Caulfield
8 Lay people actively process messages about genetics 131
Celeste M. Condit
9 Telling technological tales: the media and the evolution of biotechnology 143
Edna Einsiedel
Part 5
SECOND THOUGHTS: ETHICAL ISSUES
10 Ethical analysis of representation in the governance of biotechnology 157
Michael M. Burgess
11 The regulation of animal biotechnology:At the crossroads of law and ethics 173
Lyne Létourneau
12 Second thoughts on biobanks : The Icelandic experience 193
Gardar Árnason
Part 6
REFLECTIONS BEYOND THE HERE AND NOW
13 In search of nanoscale economics:Intellectual property and nano-mercantilism in the pre-assembler
and assembler stages of nanotechnology 207
Michael D. Mehta and Linda Goldenberg
14 Inhuman, superhuman, or posthuman ? Images of genetic futures 225
Jon Turney
Part 7
CONCLUSIONS
15 The future of genomics 239
Peter W. B. Phillips and Edna Einsiedel
Contributors 249
Index 257
5 Involving Communities:
A Matter of Trust &Communication1
Béatrice Godard
1 INTRODUCTION: THE CARTAGENE PROJECT
THE CARTAGENE PROJECT AIMS to map genetic variation in a large sample of the adult
population of Quebec. The CARTaGENE resource will allow large-scale medical,
pharmacogenomics and public health studies – including association studies of common
diseases or ‘protective’ phenotypes – and is expected to lead to the discovery of new
susceptibility genes. The demographic component of the project will determine mutation
frequencies in the different regions of the province, and, thus, guide the establishment of medical
genetic services tailored to the needs of the regional sub-populations. In more general terms, the
goal of the research is to provide information required for an optimal use of genetic knowledge
and technology in the health care system.
The investigators of the CARTaGENE project propose the following:
1 Random selection of 50,000 adults between twenty-five and seventy-four years of age,
representing 1% of the population in each of the respective age groups. The recruitment will be
unbiased as far as disease and ethnic origin are concerned, and will be representative, not only
with regard to the diversity of the population, but also with respect to its density. The population of
Quebec is homogeneous in certain aspects, but heterogeneous in others. Approximately 55% of
the population lives in southwest Quebec, in the vicinity of Montreal, which is, with its nineteen
languages, more heterogeneous than the rest of the Quebec population, which is composed
mainly of French Canadian descendants.
2 Anonymization of personal, medical and sociological data of consenting participants, as well as
of biological samples obtained at the time of interview.
3 Provision of comprehensive knowledge of genetic variation in a large population.
4 Contributing to the development of tools and strategies for detailed phenotyping.
5 The organization of public consultation and the encouragement of citizen engagement.
CARTaGENE will be in the public domain and accessible to researchers, be they national or
international, and public or private. It will operate in a standardized public health network. For the
benefit of the participating population, a public authority, the Institut de Populations et de
Génétique (IPEG), has been created as the steward of CARTaGENE.² Already in 200 ,
CARTaGENE had an information session with representatives of Quebec’s Access to
Information Commission (Commission d’accès à l’information du Québec, or CAIQ) in order to
explain the framework in which the investigators would present their request to obtain permission
for access to the Quebec’s Health Insurance Authority (Régie d’assurance maladie du Québec, or
RAMQ) list of enrolees and medical data. The members of the CAIQ did not foresee
insurmountable difficulties in eventually granting such an agreement. Discussions are still
ongoing with representatives from the Ministry of Health and Social Services of Quebec, who
are endorsing the project.
As soon as funding has been acquired, a demonstration phase will be conducted. The
ultimate goal of this preparatory phase is to obtain the approval of the CAIQ with regards to ( )
the security of personal data, (2) procedures pertaining to privacy and anonymization, as well as
(3) authorization to the RAMQ to provide nominative data (such as people’s address information,
for example) for recruitment. The preparatory phase also includes fine-tuning of the public
consultation protocol, as well as the completion of the IPEG incorporation. Ethical evaluation and
acceptance of the project will also be sought. Once this preparatory phase is finished and funding
is available for the finalized and publicly accepted CARTaGENE project, the recruitment of the
participants will start, which will be spread over four years.
2 THE COMMUNICATION STRATEGY OF CARTAGENE
The communication strategy of CARTaGENE has two components: communication with the
public and with participants, as well as communication of the results of the research to the
scientific community.
2.1 Communication with the Public and with Participants
The communication with participants and the public consists of two parts: (1) a communication
plan to inform and involve both citizens and participants prior to and during the research project,
and (2) public consultation – via citizens’ forums – to promote exchanges between researchers
and citizens, and to ensure that the latter’s opinions and views are taken into account. These two
approaches will be based on qualitative and quantitative research on social perceptions of
the CARTaGENE project.
2.1.1 Social Perceptions Research
The recruitment of fifty thousand individuals for CARTaGENE will require in-depth knowledge of
the social perceptions of the project and its approach. Some of the issues we want to address, for
example, include the following: what are the risks perceived by lay people? Are there differences
in perception among geographic areas or among cultural communities? Furthermore, what are
the major challenges of recruitment? In order to develop a coherent strategy – especially given
the presence of a variety of ethical and social concerns in Quebec’s pluralistic society – it is
essential that social perception research be carried out, and that relevant and effective
approaches be developed (cf. Cragg Ross Dawson 2000; Weijer and Emanuel 2000; Human
Genetics Commission 2001; People, Science and Policy 2002).
This research will allow us to expand on our findings about public perception with regard
to genomics, by analyzing them in the context of the broader ethical and social issues of which
they are part. In each region, activities in support of the social perceptions research will precede
the actual recruitment by six months; this will serve as a foundation for the planned subsequent
development of the sociological research, as well as for the logistic coordination of the
project in that region.
An initial qualitative phase will involve twenty-seven focus groups of six to eight
participants each. They will be distributed throughout Quebec, according to qualitative criteria
with respect to the linguistic, the cultural, and the regional diversity in the population. In order to
ensure that the sample is representative, participants will be chosen randomly. The use of the
focus group technique will allow us to identify the social, scientific and ethical issues as observed
in the population (Graves et al. 1998). Subsequently, a report featuring the analysis of the taperecorded results will allow us to gain a deeper understanding of the socio-ethical implications of
the social representations aspect of the project.
In order to explore the expectations of the population with respect to the CARTaGENE
project, in November 2001 four preliminary focus groups, each with different socio-demographic
characteristics (i.e., either young [age twenty to thirty-five] or old [age thirty-six to sixty-five], and
either a low or a high level of education), have been conducted in Montreal. Overall, the focus
group participants were of the opinion that scientific research is desirable. Projects such as
CARTaGENE are seen to hold promise for society. Importantly, however, reported across all
groups are concerns regarding confidentiality, respect for the individual, transparency, and the
right to feedback for the donors. These concerns will now be addressed in more detail.
Confidentiality and Respect for the Individual. It appears that, in general, individuals
favour the idea of donation for the ‘greater good,’ but they want to be assured that they will
benefit from this donation, and that their personal information will be respected. Not surprisingly,
there is a considerable degree of concern about the ways employers and insurance companies
might use human genetic information. Many fear that, if others have access to their genetic
information, they will know too much about them. Indeed, genetics can be a very useful
diagnostic tool, but in most cases the diagnosis of disease, disability, or condition depends on
probabilities. It is not clear how accurate genetic data will be as indicators of an individual’s health
or disease. Irrespective of the probabilistic nature of such genetic information, the public will need
assurances that any results of research that makes use of genetic database information will be
handled in a responsible way, and that the public’s best interests will be taken to heart.
Furthermore, the public should be made aware of the fact that the very purpose of these studies,
at least initially, is to combine genetic information with genealogical, demographic, environmental
and medical data.
Transparency. Concerns about transparency were raised, especially concerning the issue
of informed consent. It is important to explain to the public why the sample collection is being set
up and how the samples will be used. Furthermore, it is important to seek explicit consent for
access to an individual’s medical records. In keeping with the principle of transparency, it will be
necessary to make clear to donors that their samples could be used in ways that currently
cannot be foreseen.
The Right to Feedback. The donors’ right to feedback is another universal concern. They
need to know what sort of feedback they will get on what sort of diseases, if any at all. Many
members of the focus groups view feedback as an important potential motivator for participation.
They have expectations that the results of research or tests will provide them with a cornucopia of
personal information.
Public Ownership. Some members of the focus groups raised the issue of the ownership
of medical and genetic databases. There was a concern that exclusivity of research resources
would have negative implications, such as restriction of the access to data and the
commercialization of the results of the research. Consistent with this concern, we found an
extensive degree of support for the notion of public ownership of these databases.
A subsequent, quantitative phase will lead to an internal validation of the questionnaire
administered to the participants of the focus groups. The questionnaire will be modeled after the
views and concerns expressed by the focus group participants. A telephone survey will be
conducted in all eighteen regions (2100 questionnaires) to validate the results obtained through
the twenty-seven focus groups. The results of this second phase will be compared to the results
of the qualitative phase, hence allowing an assessment of the qualitative results in light of the
quantitative ones. In turn, this will help assess (1) how perceptions are distributed, (2) the
explanations as gleaned from focus group findings for positions identified in the surveys; and (3)
what effect information and discussion sessions have had on the perceptions of the
CARTaGENE project.
2.1.2 The Communication Plan
CARTaGENE’s team strives to establish a long-term partnership and a constructive dialogue
between the scientific community and society. This requires that the public be informed and that
participants be consulted. This discussion and partnership approach, although so far not fully
realized in population genomics, is in line with the team’s efforts to create transparency and openmindedness at all levels of the project (Habermas 1992, 1997). The partnership approach favours
values such as integrity, ethical pluralism, mutual respect, respect for others, and democracy
(Health Canada 2000; Thibault et al. 2000). This approach does not adhere to a passive
conception of citizenship, but, instead, integrates an active and collective one, where
preoccupations and interests of citizens are taken into account (Kymlicka and Norman 1994;
Emmanuel 1996; Gutman and Thompson 1997; National Institutes of Health 2002). In addition to
facilitating recruitment and retention of participants, increasing participation can also contribute to
the identification and minimization of the risks associated with research. Hence, both researchers
and participants have a mutual interest to take on the project together and as partners (Goggin
1986; Sclove 1998; May 2001). The information and consultation processes will be transparent.
They will be either periodic or continuous, depending on the different methods planned. The
communication and consultation plans require the development of procedures and mechanisms
for the implementation of information and consultation campaigns. Different techniques have
been implemented or are planned to inform and involve citizens, both during the research project
proper, and before its launch.
Prior to the Start of the Research Project
• June 2001: First semi-public workshop on the project and its ethical and legal aspects: 125
professionals in ethics, law as well as decision- and policymaking attended the workshop.
• From July 2001 onwards: The web site of the Quebec Network of Applied Genetic Medicine
(Réseau de médecine génétique appliquée, or RMGA) has been updated to inform the
public about CARTaGENE’s nature and its ethical and social framework. CARTaGENE
has also created its own web site (CARTaGENE n.d.). It contains mass media articles
published about the project, and it has a readership of 600,000 to 800,000 individuals.
A large number of inquiries for participation have been received. The web site will be adapted to
address more specific communication needs as the project evolves.
• From August 2001 onwards: Newsletters have been published regularly to facilitate liaison with
experts, the media, and the public. So far, four have been produced, which are available
on the CARTaGENE web site. During the course of the project, the newsletters will
particularly be of interest to participants in the research. They will also be emailed to
Quebec research networks and weekly magazines.
• Ongoing: Press releases and media presentations have already informed the population about
the project’s objectives and its public communication strategy. A press release has been
seen in November 2001 and more than 2.5 million readers have had the opportunity to be
informed about CARTaGENE. The CARTaGENE project has also been presented to
various key authorities in Quebec: The Information Access Commission, the Director
Committee of the Ministry of Social Services and Health, the Statistics Institute of Quebec
and the Ministry of Technology, Science and Research. Furthermore, a presentation to
the Ethics Commission of the Ministry’s Council has been scheduled.
• June 2003: A second semi-public workshop with professionals in ethics, law, decision- and
policy-making was held in order to update these specialists about the developments on
the project and its ethical and legal aspects since the first workshop two years earlier.
The ethical and legal aspects of the CARTaGENE project have also been discussed
during the Third International DNA Sampling Conference held in Montreal, in September
2002. Besides, in 2002 the RMGA has drawn up a Statement on the Ethical Conduct of
Genetic Research Involving Populations (Réseau de médecine génétique appliquée
2002). All RMGA members are bound by this Statement.
• Six months before recruitment: A ‘1-800’ information hotline will be set up to facilitate public
inquiries and to communicate information about the project. An information leaflet as well
as posters will further promote the dissemination of information about the project’s
objectives and approaches to the general public and to the participants in the research.
During the Research Stage
• During recruitment: Information sessions (general sessions in the different regions, as well as
ones dedicated to specific indigenous peoples and ethno-cultural communities) will help
to inform the population and will endorse a representative and diversified participation.
• Ongoing: Press releases and media presentations will provide the public with up-to-date
information about the project. The 1–800 information hotline will be maintained for
inquiries from research participants and the general public. On the CARTaGENE web
site, comments and articles, news updates, as well as a follow-up to the citizens’ forum
recommendations will be available to the public. On the web site of the Human Genetics
Commission, a deliberative electronic forum, called “PopGen,” will list the FAQ s about
public population genomics projects.
• Ongoing: In accordance with its mandate, which guarantees a decision-making process that
ensures the public and social mission of CARTaGENE, the Institut de Populations et de
Génétique (IPEG) will endorse the citizens’ forum recommendations and guidelines for
communication of the results of the research, after having sought advise from an
independent ethics committee and a scientific advisory board. During the research
project, IPEG will support the Citizens’ Committee for ongoing consultations regarding
the progress of the project, in order to maintain a partnership approach.
2.1.3 The Public Consultation Plan
Obtaining the public’s opinions cannot be achieved through information sessions alone.
Consultation mechanisms favouring exchanges between researchers and citizens have been
planned to ensure that their opinions and views are taken into account, as established by
CARTaGENE’s partnership approach (Jennings 1990; Reiser 1991).
A citizens’ forum, made up of a diverse group of people, will be organized, which will
provide them with opportunities to learn about the project, to examine its ethical and social
aspects, and to formulate an ethical opinion report about the project. This transparent
consultation mechanism will allow citizens to get actively involved in the evaluation of the project
and will give them the opportunity to submit an informed public opinion to the researchers, who, in
turn, will need to respond to the issues publicly (Grundahl 1995; Smith and Wales 1999, 2000).
The schedule will be as follows.
• Six months before the recruitment of CARTaGENE’s participants:
Creation of an independent committee to select candidates according to the established
criteria (representativeness for gender, age, education, occupation, urban versus rural
residence, ethnicity, values, and interests).
• First three months: Forum meetings. Selection of witnesses by experts and lay people retained
to inform the citizens’ forum, prior to the drafting of opinion.
• First month: Selection of fifteen citizens by the independent committee; assembly of a list of
potential witnesses; first information session for chosen citizens, and delegation of
consultation process organization to the forum.
• Second month: Second weekend information session. Proposition of a list of witnesses.
• After six months: Actual citizens’ forum (one weekend): expert testimony; ethical and social
aspect report drafting; press release on citizens’ forum opinion.
• Ongoing: Citizens’ forum meeting, which becomes a citizens’ committee that maintains ongoing
consultations regarding the development of the project.
In addition to the citizens’ forum, the above-mentioned deliberative electronic forum, “PopGen,”
on the web site of the Human Genetics Commission will provide opportunities for permanent
discussion and exchange of information and ideas on ethical and social aspects of the project,
and will allow citizens to express their points of view. Moreover, articles regarding the ethical, the
social and the scientific aspects of the project will be made available on the web site.
2.2 Communication of the Results of the Research
Guidelines for scientific communication will be published, in order to address a number of social,
cultural, and ethical issues relevant to the communication of the research results, since genomic
knowledge is susceptible to interpretation according to different mental schemes, and is framed
according to different (cultural and other) values. For example, the issues of stigmatization and
discrimination of sub-populations are fundamental, since some of the research will be done and
interpreted in terms of regions (due to the sequential structure of the project). How can we
prevent the development of regional prejudice? (Bouchard 1994). How can we ensure an
accurate interpretation of genomic knowledge? (Mauron 2001; Pääbo 2001). The issue of public
representations of genomics will have to be dealt with, since various conceptions of the
importance of genomics to human self-understanding co-exist. Therefore, a multidisciplinary team
will formulate scientific communication guidelines to assist CARTaGENE’s researchers. These
guidelines will tackle issues concerning (1) the social representations of genomics and the
diversity of genomics’ interpretations; (2) the perception of stigmatization and discrimination in
population genomics; (3) popular genetics education; and (4) the development of ethical
approaches for public communication of population genomics research results.
3 THE CHALLENGES OF INVOLVING COMMUNITIES
Public consultation of communities in genomics research is still in its infancy. Researchers are
just beginning to work with named populations and they are not legally required to conduct
consultations within communities. While ethical review boards often consider the implications of
the research project for the community, community consultation is not required in the Research
Ethics Board (ERB) approval process. There is no agreement about the ethical and policy goals
that public consultation can achieve and about which methods best address these particular
goals. Neither is there much agreement regarding the types of issues on which consultations
should be held, nor with respect to the standards by which oversight bodies should evaluate them
(Weijer et al. 1999).
Though not legally required, many factors impel investigators to engage communities.
It is difficult even for highly knowledgeable people to understand the nature and purpose of largescale genetics databases. Moreover, due to the scale of these databases, the risk of group harm
gives greater urgency to ensuring that communities understand the project, and to seeking their
input regarding how the project and the groups are described and the data used. There is a
growing public concern about protection for communities in genetic research, hence, initiating a
dialogue with a community is imperative if we truly are to consider participants as partners
(Shickle 2001). With that in mind, policy recommendations have recently been issued (National
Institutes of Health 2002; Réseau de médecine génétique appliquée 2002; Commission de
l’éthique de la science et de la technologie 2003).
There are clear advantages to involving communities. An ongoing dialogue creates
greater comprehension and it addresses potential concerns of the public. Community involvement
increases the robustness of the individual consent process, essentially making it an informed
decision-making process. As stated by the National Institutes of Health (2002),
… community consultation may achieve goals not attainable
through individual informed consent and standard ethics
review… .Community consultation is also intended to elicit
feedback regarding potential participants’ relevant values,
preferences, concerns, or judgments. As partners in,
rather than simply as subjects of, the research activity,
consultation increases the likelihood that community
members will feel empowered rather than exploited”
(National Institutes of Health 2002, 6).
However, conducting community consultations for genomics research is a delicate matter; issues
of representativeness, social identity, internal politics, and cross-cultural differences abound
(Juengst 2000). Conflicts may arise when individual and community interests conflict. For
instance, if the community consents to research participation, individuals may still refuse to
participate. On the other hand, if the community does not consent, then individuals who are
identified because they are members of the community should not be approached for study
enrolment.
Finally, there is the question how community involvement may be encouraged. Even with
the willingness to respect values such as fair representation, transparency, and accountability,
there is still a risk that the public mistrusts researchers and simply does not participate in
sufficient numbers. Other DNA and data-banking projects have failed because of public concerns.
For example, a company called Autogen attempted to set up a genetic database using the entire
population of Tonga, an island in the South Pacific. The Tongans opposed the establishment of
the database because of concerns about informed consent, and about the lack of prior public
discussion (Burton 2002). Consequently, the project was halted. Likewise, in the U.S.A., the
National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute refused, apparently due to community concerns, to
allow Boston University to close a deal with a private company for the use of the publicly acquired
data from the well-known Framingham community study (Philipkoski 2001). This disregard for
public opinion led to suspicion of the initiators and their motives. The founders of CARTaGENE
are not immune from such risks.
4 CONCLUSIONS
CARTaGENE researchers aim to integrate an active and collective partnership approach, where
preoccupations and interests of citizens are taken into account. They also aim for transparency
and openness at all levels. In fact, initiating a dialogue with a community is beneficial to
researchers and the public alike. Community involvement promotes a two-way communication
between investigators and the community: on the one hand, investigators can inform the
community about the research and its outcomes, and, on the other, the community can inform
investigators about their interests and concerns. Although there are no guarantees that a
community consultation will prevent harm on the basis of research findings, openness to
discussion creates a forum for members to learn how to deal with scientific conclusions and
potential outcomes of research.
Notes
1 This work was part of the Genomics in Society: Responsibilities and Rights project, funded by Genome Quebec.
2 ipeg is a public non-profit organization, created for the governance, administration and regulation of cartagene’s activities.
REFERENCES
Bouchard, G. 1994. Les problèmes de droit et d’éthique reliés à l’exploitation d’un fichier de population à des
fins génétiques. In Bioéthique et génétique: Une réflexion collective, ed. M. Mélançon, 33–42.
Chicoutimi, QC: JCL.
Burton, B. 2002. Proposed Genetic Database on Tongans Opposed. British Medical Journal 324:443.
CARTaGENE. N.d. www.cartagene.qc.ca
Commission de l’éthique de la science et de la technologie. 2003. Opinion Statement: The Ethical Issues of
Genetic Databases; Towards Democratic and Responsible Regulation. Quebec: Gouvernement du
Québec.
www.ethique.gouv.qc.ca/eng/publications.html
Cragg Ross Dawson. 2000. Public Perceptions of the Collection of Human Biological Samples. London,
U.K.: Wellcome Trust / Medical Research Council.
www.wellcome.ac.U.K./en/genome/geneticsandsociety/hg16f002.html
Emmanuel, E. 1996. Where Civic Republicanism and Deliberative Democracy Meet. Hastings Center Report
26, no. 6:12–14.
Foster, M. W., R. R. Sharp, W. L. Freeman, M. Chino, D. Bernsten, and T. H. Carter. 1999. The Role of
Community Review in Evaluating the Risks of Human Genetic Variation in Research. American Journal
of Human Genetics 64:1719–27.
Goggin, M. L. 1986. Governing Science and Technology Democratically: A Conceptual Framework. In
Governing Science and Technology in a Democracy, ed. M. L. Goggin, 3–31. Knoxville: University of
Tennessee Press.
Graves, F., P. Beauchamp, and D. Herle. 1998. Recherche sur les valeurs de la population relativement à la
santé et au système de santé. La santé au Canada:Un héritage à faire fructifier. Vol. 5: Données
probantes et information, 367–458.
Sainte-Foy, QC: Multimondes.
Grundahl, J. 1995. The Danish Consensus Conference Model. In Public Participation in Science: The Role
of Consensus Conferences in Europe, ed. S. Joss and J. Durant, 31–40. London, U.K.: Science
Museum, with the Support of the European Commission Directorate General 12.
Gutman, A., and D. Thompson. 1997. Deliberating about Bioethics. Hastings Center Report 27, no. 3:38–41.
Habermas, J. 1992. De l’éthique de la discussion, trans. M. Hunyadi. Paris: Flammarion. ——— . 1997.
Droit et démocratie. Mayenne: Gallimard.
Health Canada. 2000. Public Involvement: Framework and Guidelines. Ottawa:Minister of Public Works and
Government Services Canada.
Human Genetics Commission (HGC). 2001. Public Attitudes to Human Genetic Information: People’s Panel
Quantitative Study. London, U.K.: HGC.
www.hgc.gov.U.K./Client/document.asp?DocId=37
Jennings, B. 1990. Bioethics and Democracy. Centennial Review 34, no. 2:207–25.
Juengst, E. 2000. What ‘Community Review’ Can and Cannot Do. Journal of Law, Medicine, and Ethics 28,
no. 1:52–54.
Kymlicka, W., and W. Norman. 1994. Return of the Citizen: A Survey of Recent Work on Citizenship Theory.
Ethics 104:352–81.
Mauron, A. 2001. Is the Genome the Secular Equivalent of the Soul? Science 291:831–32.
May, R. 2001. Science and Society. Science 292:1021.
National Institutes of Health. 2002. Points to Consider when Planning a Genetic Study that Involves
Members of Named Populations.
www.nih.gov/sigs/bioethics/named_populations.html
Pääbo, S. 2001. The Human Genome and Our View of Ourselves. Science 291:1219–20.
People, Science and Policy. 2002. Biobank U.K.: A Question of Trust;A Consultation Exploring and
Addressing Questions of PublicTrust. London, U.K.: Medical Research Council / Wellcome Trust.
www.U.K.biobank.ac.U.K./documents/consultation.pdf (item now discontinued).
Philipkoski, K. 2001. Framingham Gene Project Killed. Wired News, 2 January.
www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,40941,00.html
Réseau de médecine génétique appliquée. 2002. Statement of Principles on the Ethical Conduct of Genetic
Research Involving Populations.
www.RMGA.qc.ca/en/f_pub_enonces.htm#Énoncés
Reiser, S. 1991. The Public and the Expert in Biomedical Policy Controversies. In Biomedical Politics, ed. E.
H. Kathi, 325–31. Washington DC: National Academy Press.
Sclove, R. 1998. Better Approaches to Science Policy. Science 279, no. 5355:1283.
Shickle, D. 2001. A Matter of Opinion: New Methods of Public Consultation. Wellcome Trust Magazine 29,
no. Q4:16–17.
www.wellcome.ac.U.K./en/1/awtpubnwswnoi29ana8.html (item now discontinued).
Smith, G., and C. Wales. 1999. The Theory and Practice of Citizens’ Juries. Policy and Politics, 27, no.
3:295–308. ——— . 2000. Citizen’s Juries and Deliberative Democracy. Political Studies 48:51–65.
Thibault, A., M. Lequin, and M. Tremblay. 2000. Cadre de référence de la participation publique:
Démocratique, utile et crédible. Sainte-Foy, QC: Conseil de la santé et du bien-être, Gouvernement du
Québec.
Weijer, C., and E. J. Emanuel. 2000. Protecting Communities in Biomedical Research. Science 289:1142–
44.
Weijer, C., G. Goldsand, and E. J. Emanuel. 1999. Protecting Communities in Research:Current Guidelines
and Limits of Extrapolation. Nature Genetics 23, no. 3:275–80.