Bioethical Issues: 25 Controversial Examples Explained

Bioethical issues are hard moral questions that come from biology, medicine, and health care. Should parents be allowed to edit their baby’s genes? Who gets the next donated kidney? Can a dying patient ask a doctor for help to end their life?

These questions rarely have easy answers. Thoughtful people often disagree, because the facts alone do not settle them.

This guide explains what bioethics is and the principles behind it. Then it walks through 25 of the most debated bioethical issues today, from abortion and cloning to AI and brain implants. Each issue comes with its key ethical questions and a debate question you can use in class.

Bioethical Issues Guide:

• What Is Bioethics?
• What Makes an Issue Bioethical?
• Core Principles of Bioethics
• Top Bioethical Issues
• Beginning of Life Issues
• Genetics and Biotechnology Issues
• Research Ethics Issues
• Health Care and End of Life Issues
• Technology and Data Issues
• Far-Future Ideas
• Key Moments in Bioethics History
• How to Analyze a Bioethical Issue
• Bioethics Debate Topics
• Frequently Asked Questions
• Key Takeaways
• Jump to comments

What Is Bioethics?

Bioethics is ethics applied to life and health. Science tells us what we can do. Bioethics asks what we should do.

The field covers health care, medicine, research, biotechnology, and the environment.^[1] It draws on biology, medicine, philosophy, law, and religion. People start from different values, so bioethics debates can get heated.

What Bioethicists Do

A bioethicist is an expert who studies these moral questions. Many work in hospitals. They help doctors, patients, and families when they disagree about care. This is called clinical ethics consultation.^[5]

Bioethicists also serve on ethics committees, write hospital policies, and teach. Others do research or work on health policy.^[6]

What Makes an Issue Bioethical?

A bioethical issue is an ethical question that comes up in medicine, health care, biology, biotechnology, public health, or a related life science.^[1] Some of these issues are dilemmas, where important values or duties conflict and you cannot honor all of them at once. Others are questions about rights and duties, consent, privacy, risk, or how to write fair rules.

Here is a dilemma. A new cancer drug works, but it costs a fortune. Helping the patient in front of you is good. Spending limited money fairly for everyone is also good. You cannot fully do both.

Not every bioethical issue is that tight a conflict. Who may read a patient’s records, and what a researcher owes a volunteer, are bioethics questions too.

Ethical vs. Bioethical Dilemmas

An ethical dilemma arises when moral requirements or reasons for action conflict and cannot all be satisfied.^[7] A step-by-step framework helps you work through one.^[8]

A bioethical dilemma is the same kind of conflict inside medicine, health care, or the life sciences. So every bioethical dilemma is an ethical dilemma. But not every ethical dilemma is bioethical. Deciding whether to tell a friend an awkward truth is an ethical dilemma. Deciding how much to tell a frightened patient about a grim diagnosis is a bioethical one.

Core Principles of Bioethics

Many bioethics debates come back to four widely taught principles.^[9] They give people a shared language, even when they reach different answers.

These ideas also shape the rules for research. The 1979 Belmont Report names three basic principles for research on people: respect for persons, beneficence, and justice.^[10]

Top Bioethical Issues

Here are the 25 bioethical issues covered in this guide. They are grouped into six areas. Select any issue to jump to it.

Beginning of Life Issues

These issues deal with how life starts and who gets to decide.

1. Abortion

An induced abortion is a medical procedure that ends a pregnancy on purpose. It can be done with medicine or with a procedure. A miscarriage is different. Doctors call it a spontaneous abortion, and it happens on its own before the 20th week of pregnancy.^[11]

Abortion is one of the most divided debates in bioethics. Philosophers mostly argue about these questions.^[12]

• Does an embryo or fetus have full moral status, like a born person?
• If it does, when does that status begin?
• Even if a fetus has a right to life, does a pregnant woman have the right to control what happens to her own body?

Laws differ widely around the world. In 2022, the US Supreme Court held in Dobbs that the Constitution does not confer a right to abortion. That returned most authority to elected lawmakers, so abortion law now differs sharply from state to state.^[13]

2. Surrogacy

In surrogacy, a woman carries a pregnancy for someone else. The people who will raise the child are called the intended parents. There are two types.^[14]

• Traditional surrogacy: The surrogate uses her own egg. She is the baby’s genetic mother.
• Gestational surrogacy: The carrier receives an embryo made through IVF. She has no genetic link to the baby.

Gestational surrogacy is now the usual form. Traditional surrogacy is rare in modern clinics.^[15]

Key ethical questions:

• Could payment pressure women with little money into carrying a pregnancy?^[16]
• Does paid surrogacy treat women’s bodies or babies like products?
• Who are the legal parents if the agreement breaks down?

Laws range from complete bans to legal paid surrogacy.^[16] In the United States, each state sets its own rules.^[15]

3. IVF and Embryo Screening

In vitro fertilization (IVF) joins an egg and sperm in a lab dish. The embryo is then placed in the uterus.^[17] The first IVF baby, Louise Brown, was born in England in 1978.^[18] In 2022, infants conceived using assisted reproductive technology (ART) made up about 2.6 percent of all infants born in the United States.^[19]

IVF also lets doctors test embryos before transfer. This is called preimplantation genetic testing (PGT). It can check embryos for specific genetic disorders.^[20] Newer tests try to estimate an embryo’s risk for common conditions that involve many genes. The American Society for Reproductive Medicine calls this a nascent and unproven technology. Its ethics committee says it should not be offered clinically yet, and that such testing belongs in research with proper review.^[21]

Key ethical questions:

• Could embryo selection slide toward “designer babies” chosen for looks or intelligence?^[22]
• Does screening send a negative message about people living with disabilities?^[21]
• What should happen to the large number of unused frozen embryos in storage?^[23]
• Is it fair that mostly families who can pay get access?

These questions carry real legal weight. In February 2024, the Alabama Supreme Court ruled that frozen embryos count as children under the state’s wrongful death law. Some clinics paused IVF. Alabama then passed a law to protect IVF providers from lawsuits.^[24]

A related technique, mitochondrial donation, uses healthy mitochondria from a donor egg. In 2025, UK researchers reported that eight babies had been born this way.^[25] In the United States, Congress has barred the FDA from accepting applications for clinical research using this method since 2015.^[26] For more, see our guide to the pros and cons of designer babies.

Genetics and Biotechnology Issues

Modern biotechnology lets scientists read, copy, and change DNA. These powers raise some of the biggest questions in bioethics.

4. Cloning

Cloning makes a genetic copy of a cell or a whole organism. Scientists move the DNA from a body cell into an egg whose own nucleus has been removed. This is called somatic cell nuclear transfer. There are two main goals.^[27]

• Reproductive cloning creates a copy of a whole animal.
• Therapeutic cloning creates embryonic stem cells for research and possible tissue repair. It does not grow spare organs.

Dolly the sheep was born in 1996. She was cloned from the udder cell of an adult sheep. Researchers ran 277 nuclear transfer attempts, and only one produced a live lamb.^[27] Cloned animals can also have health problems, such as defects in the liver, brain, and heart. Despite several publicized claims, there is no solid scientific evidence that anyone has cloned a human.^[27]

Key ethical questions:

• Is human reproductive cloning ever acceptable, given the high failure rate and health risks?
• Therapeutic cloning destroys early embryos. Is that morally acceptable?
• Would a human clone be treated as a unique person or as a copy of someone else?

Many countries ban human reproductive cloning.^[28] To dig deeper, read our guide to the pros and cons of cloning.

5. Stem Cell Research

Stem cells can renew themselves and develop into specialized cells. Scientists study three main types.^[29]

• Embryonic stem cells come from embryos that are only a few days old.
• Adult stem cells live in tissues such as bone marrow and help repair the body.
• Induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cells are adult cells that have been reprogrammed to act like embryonic stem cells.

The main debate is about embryonic stem cells. Collecting them destroys the embryo. People who believe an embryo has the moral status of a person see this as wrong. Others argue that the chance to treat serious diseases justifies the research.^[30]

Scientists made iPS cells from mouse cells in 2006 and from human cells a year later.^[31] These cells avoid destroying embryos. They still raise questions, such as whether they could one day be used to make eggs or sperm.^[30]

Hype is another problem. The FDA warns about clinics that sell unapproved stem cell treatments. Some of these products have caused blindness, tumors, and infections.^[32] Approved options are still limited. Most are blood-forming stem cells from umbilical cord blood.^[32] In December 2024, the FDA also approved Ryoncil, the first mesenchymal stromal cell therapy, for a serious complication of bone marrow transplants in children.^[33]

Embryo research also has limits. For years, a “14-day rule” served as a widely used ethical limit on growing human embryos in the lab. In some countries it is also written into law. In 2021, the International Society for Stem Cell Research moved research past that point into a category that needs specialized scientific and ethics review.^[34] Its current guidelines ask national academies and regulators to lead public conversations first, and any such work still has to follow local law.^[35]

Learn more about where stem cells come from and the pros and cons of stem cell research.

6. Eugenics

Eugenics is the idea of “improving” the human population by controlling who has children. The British scientist Francis Galton coined the term in 1883.^[36]

Eugenics was popular long before Nazi Germany. In the early 1900s, it had wide support in the United States and Britain. US state laws led to the forced sterilization of at least 60,000 people.^[36] In 1927, the US Supreme Court upheld forced sterilization in a case called Buck v. Bell.^[37]

Nazi Germany took these ideas to horrific extremes. Its 1933 sterilization law was based in part on US practice.^[38] Its so-called “euthanasia” program then murdered disabled people. The program was in many ways a rehearsal for the Holocaust.^[39]

New genetic tools bring back some old worries. Screening embryos for behavior or intelligence would echo the history of eugenics.^[36] Some ethicists warn that polygenic embryo scores raise the specter of eugenics too.^[40]

Key ethical questions:

• Where is the line between preventing disease and choosing “better” people?
• Who decides which traits count as undesirable?
• Could social or financial pressure push parents into screening?

7. Genetically Modified Organisms

A genetically modified organism (GMO) is a plant, animal, or microbe whose DNA has been changed with genetic engineering. GMOs are not new. The first genetically engineered produce, a tomato, went on sale in 1994.^[41] Engineered seeds for major field crops arrived in 1996. Today, more than 90 percent of US corn, soybean, and cotton acres are planted with herbicide-tolerant engineered seed.^[42]

What about safety? A major 2016 National Academies report found no substantiated evidence that engineered crops on the market are riskier to eat than conventional crops.^[43] Much of today’s debate therefore focuses on other questions, including labeling, seed ownership, environmental effects, and animal welfare.

Key ethical questions:

• Labeling: Do shoppers have a right to know what they are buying? Since 2022, US rules require disclosure of bioengineered foods.^[44]
• Control of seeds: Companies patent engineered seeds. The US Supreme Court ruled that farmers cannot replant patented seeds without the patent holder’s permission.^[45]
• Environment: Some weeds have evolved resistance to glyphosate, the weed killer most engineered crops were built to tolerate.^[43]
• Animal welfare: Engineered animals raise welfare concerns.^[46] The FDA approved AquAdvantage salmon, an engineered fish, in 2015.^[47]
• Gene drives: A gene drive could spread a trait through wild mosquitoes to fight diseases like malaria. In 2016, the National Academies said these organisms were not ready for release.^[48]

Read more about the disadvantages of genetically modified foods and the pros and cons of genetic engineering.

8. Human Gene Editing

CRISPR is a tool that lets scientists change DNA at a chosen spot.^[49] Emmanuelle Charpentier and Jennifer Doudna described it in 2012. They won the 2020 Nobel Prize in Chemistry.^[50]

The key ethical line falls between two kinds of editing.^[49]

• Somatic editing changes body cells in one patient. The changes are not inherited.
• Germline editing changes eggs, sperm, or embryos. The changes can pass to future generations.

Somatic editing is already helping patients. In December 2023, the FDA approved Casgevy for sickle cell disease. It was the first FDA-approved therapy to use CRISPR.^[51] In 2025, doctors in Philadelphia treated a baby named KJ with a gene-editing therapy built just for him.^[52] NIH called it the first known case of a personalized CRISPR medicine given to a single patient.^[53]

Germline editing is far more controversial. In 2018, Chinese scientist He Jiankui announced twin girls whose embryos he had edited. A court later sentenced him to three years in prison.^[54] In 2023, organizers of an international summit said heritable human genome editing “remains unacceptable at this time.”^[55]

Key ethical questions:

• Future generations cannot consent to changes in their genes.^[56]
• Could editing slide from treating disease to enhancing traits?
• Will gene editing only reach the wealthy?^[56] Casgevy was listed at $2.2 million per patient.^[57]

See our guide to the pros and cons of gene therapy.

9. Newborn Genome Sequencing

Newborns in the United States already get a screening test. A nurse makes a small puncture in the baby’s heel and collects a few drops of blood.^[58]

Whole genome sequencing reads nearly all of a baby’s DNA. In research studies, it finds more. New York City’s GUARDIAN study found serious conditions in 120 of the first 4,000 babies sequenced. Standard screening had caught only 10 of them.^[59] Boston’s BabySeq Project found unexpected disease risks in 11 percent of the babies it sequenced.^[60]

Key ethical questions:

• Young children cannot give informed consent.^[61] Should parents learn about risks for diseases that only appear in adults?
• Many gene changes have an unclear meaning. Could results cause needless worry?
• Who stores the DNA data, and could it be used to discriminate against the child later?^[62]

In the United States, the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) protects people from genetic discrimination in health insurance and jobs. It does not cover life, disability, or long-term care insurance.^[63] Read more about the pros and cons of genetic testing.

10. Precision Medicine

Precision medicine tailors prevention and treatment to a person’s genes, environment, and lifestyle.^[64] It depends on huge amounts of health data. The NIH All of Us Research Program aims to enroll one million people.^[65] By mid-2026, more than 880,000 people had joined.^[66]

Key ethical questions:

• Privacy: NHGRI notes that a DNA sample can never be truly anonymized.^[67]
• Fairness: In an analysis summarized by NHGRI, about 78 percent of participants in large genomic studies were of European ancestry.^[68] Findings may not work as well for groups that were left out.
• Discrimination: Could genetic data affect life insurance or other coverage that GINA does not protect?^[63]
• Cost: Will tailored treatments reach everyone, or only people who can pay?

Research Ethics Issues

Research on people and animals has led to huge medical advances. It has also led to some of the worst abuses in science. These issues are about doing research the right way.

11. Informed Consent

Informed consent means a person agrees to join a study after learning what it involves. The rule grew out of tragedy.

After World War II, Nazi doctors were put on trial for cruel experiments on prisoners. The 1947 Nuremberg Code came out of that trial. Its first rule says: “The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.”^[69]

The United States had its own scandal. Starting in 1932, the US Public Health Service studied 600 Black men in Tuskegee, Alabama. Of these men, 399 had syphilis. By 1943, penicillin was the treatment of choice for syphilis. Yet the men in the study were not offered it. The study did not end until 1972.^[70]

In 1974, Congress passed the National Research Act. It created the national commission that later wrote the Belmont Report.^[71] Today, US rules say a consent form must explain:^[72]

• The purpose, procedures, and expected length of the study
• The risks and possible benefits
• Other options, such as standard treatment
• How private information will be protected
• That joining is voluntary and you can quit at any time without penalty

An Institutional Review Board (IRB) reviews studies to protect the rights and welfare of the people taking part.^[73]

Key ethical questions:

• Can very sick or very poor people give truly free consent?
• When wealthy countries run studies in poorer countries, is there a risk of exploitation?^[74]
• How much must people understand before their consent counts as informed?

12. Biobanking

A biobank is like a library of biological samples, such as blood, tissue, and DNA, that are stored for research.^[75] Many donors give “broad consent.” This lets researchers use their samples in future studies that are not yet planned.^[72]

The most famous case is Henrietta Lacks. In 1951, doctors at Johns Hopkins took cells from her cervical tumor without her knowledge or consent. Her “HeLa” cells were the first human cells to be grown steadily for research. They became a vital tool in biomedical science.^[76]

Johns Hopkins now says it could have and should have done more to inform and work with the Lacks family.^[77] In 2013, NIH and the family reached an agreement on how researchers can access HeLa genome data.^[76] In 2023, the Lacks estate settled a lawsuit against a company that sold HeLa cells.^[78]

Another case involved the Havasupai Tribe of Arizona. Tribe members gave blood samples starting in 1990. They understood the research was about diabetes. Researchers later used the samples to study schizophrenia, inbreeding, and human migration. In 2010, Arizona State University agreed to pay $700,000 to 41 tribe members and return the samples.^[79]

Key ethical questions:

• Who owns your cells once they leave your body? In 1990, the California Supreme Court ruled that a patient had no right to share in profits made from his cells.^[80]
• Is broad consent truly informed if no one knows what future studies will do?
• Should donors or their communities share in profits from their samples?

13. Animal Research

Scientists use animals such as mice and rats to study diseases and test new treatments. NIH says many medical advances came from carefully planned and highly regulated animal studies.^[81] But results in animals do not always carry over to people. Alzheimer’s disease and cancer are two examples.^[82]

Many rules and guidelines for animal research build on the “3Rs.” William Russell and Rex Burch first defined them in 1959.^[83]

• Replacement: Use methods that avoid animals when possible.
• Reduction: Use fewer animals.
• Refinement: Reduce pain and distress.

US rules have gaps and overlaps. The Animal Welfare Act does not cover birds, rats, or mice bred for research.^[84] Separate NIH policy covers every live vertebrate animal in research funded or conducted by the Public Health Service.^[85]

The field is changing fast. In late 2022, Congress passed the FDA Modernization Act 2.0. It allowed non-animal methods to support new drug testing.^[86] In 2025, the FDA announced a plan to phase out animal testing requirements for some drugs. The plan uses tools like computer models and lab-grown organoids.^[87] In 2026, the FDA said it had met its first-year goals.^[88] NIH also said it would prioritize human-based research methods.^[82]

Key ethical questions:

• Do benefits to people justify pain or death for animals?
• Should some animals, such as primates, get extra protection?
• How quickly should non-animal methods replace animal tests?

14. Dual-Use Research

Some research can help or harm, depending on who uses it. NIH calls the riskiest kind “dual-use research of concern.” Its results could be misused to seriously threaten health, crops, animals, or the environment. They could even threaten national security.^[89]

The best-known example came in 2011 and 2012. Two research groups reported H5 bird flu viruses, engineered or adapted in the lab, that could spread between ferrets through the air. One study found that only a few mutations were enough to make an H5N1 virus transmissible in ferrets.^[90] The goal was to prepare for a possible pandemic. Critics feared the methods could help someone make a dangerous virus. In early 2012, flu researchers announced a voluntary pause on the work.^[91]

US policy has shifted many times. In May 2025, an executive order paused federal funding for “dangerous gain-of-function research.”^[92] In July 2026, the federal government released a new policy. It bans federal support for this research in the United States and abroad. It also requires independent review for certain other high-risk studies.^[93]

New technology adds new worries, and the picture is changing fast. A 2025 National Academies report found that the AI tools of that time could design and redesign toxins. It also found that no available tool could design a new virus, and that physically making AI designs remained a significant barrier.^[94]

In August 2026, Stanford researchers reported using an AI model to design new bacteriophages, which are viruses that infect bacteria. They built close to 300 of the designs and found 16 that killed E. coli well.^[95]

These bacteriophages infect bacteria rather than human cells. AI design of a new human-infecting virus has not been demonstrated. Even so, that pace is why oversight rules keep being rewritten. In 2024, a group of scientists also warned against ever building “mirror bacteria“. These would be made of molecules with the opposite handedness of normal life.^[96]

Key ethical questions:

• Should risky findings be published in full, or kept partly secret?
• Who decides which experiments are too dangerous to do?
• How do we prevent misuse without blocking helpful science?

Health Care and End of Life Issues

These issues come up in hospitals, nursing homes, and doctors’ offices every day.

15. Access to Health Care

Health care resources are limited. There are only so many doctors, hospital beds, organs, and dollars. Bioethics asks how to share them fairly. This is the principle of justice at work.

Access is a problem even in wealthy countries. In 2025, 26.7 million people in the United States, or 7.9 percent, had no health insurance for the entire year.^[97] New treatments can also cost millions of dollars. Casgevy, the gene-editing therapy for sickle cell disease, was listed at $2.2 million per patient.^[57]

The COVID-19 pandemic made these choices painfully real. Some hospitals ran short of ventilators and ICU beds. The National Academies said fairness must come first when sharing scarce life-saving resources.^[98] Federal civil rights officials warned that people with disabilities must not be denied care based on stereotypes or judgments about their “worth.”^[99]

Key ethical questions:

• Is health care a basic right or a service people buy?
• In a shortage, should care go to the sickest patients, the youngest, or those most likely to survive?
• Should expensive cures be covered for everyone, even if costs strain public budgets?

16. Care for Older Adults

The world is aging. By the late 2070s, about 2.2 billion people will be 65 or older. That is projected to be more than the number of children under 18.^[100]

Caring for older adults brings hard choices. The biggest is often safety versus freedom. Should an 85-year-old with memory loss keep living alone? Who gets to decide?

Key ethical questions:

• Decision making: Many people with dementia can still express their values and choices in a reliable way.^[101] How much weight should their wishes get as the disease advances?
• Planning ahead: Advance directives let people give instructions for their care in case they can no longer speak for themselves.^[102]
• Restraints: Nursing homes cannot use physical or chemical restraints to discipline residents or for staff convenience.^[103]
• Abuse: About 1 in 10 older adults who live at home experience abuse, neglect, or exploitation.^[104]
• Caregivers: Family caregivers carry heavy loads. Nearly 1 in 5 report fair or poor health.^[105]

17. Euthanasia and Assisted Dying

These terms often get mixed up, but they mean different things.^[106]

• Euthanasia: A doctor directly causes a patient’s death, usually by giving a lethal drug.
• Physician-assisted suicide: A doctor prescribes a lethal drug, and the patient chooses to take it. In the United States, this is often called medical aid in dying.
• Withholding or withdrawing treatment: A patient refuses or stops life support. Many ethicists treat this as separate, because the goal is not to cause death.

Laws vary around the world. The Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, Colombia, Canada, New Zealand, and Spain all allow euthanasia.^[107] In the United States, a growing list of states allows medical aid in dying for terminally ill adults. Euthanasia itself remains illegal in every state. Oregon was first, with a law enacted in 1997.^[108] More than a dozen US jurisdictions have now authorized the practice.^[109]

Two of the newest laws show how long the gap between passing a law and using it can be. Illinois passed its End-of-Life Options for Terminally Ill Patients Act in 2025, and the law took effect on September 12, 2026, after a federal judge declined to block it.^[110][111] New York’s governor signed its Medical Aid in Dying Act on February 6, 2026, and that law took effect on August 5, 2026.^[112]

Supporters point to patient autonomy and relief from suffering that nothing else can ease. Opponents point to the value of every human life and the risk of pressure on vulnerable people.^[106]

The American Medical Association’s Code of Medical Ethics opposes physician-assisted suicide. It calls the practice “fundamentally incompatible with the physician’s role as healer.”^[113]

Key ethical questions:

• Is there a moral difference between letting someone die and helping them die?
• Can safeguards protect people who feel like a burden to others?
• Should people with dementia or mental illness ever qualify?

18. Organ Donation

Organ transplants save lives, but there are not enough organs. In the United States, more than 100,000 people are on the national transplant waiting list. Twelve people die each day while waiting. One donor can save up to eight lives.^[114]

So who gets an organ? The US matching system weighs several factors. They include blood type, body size, how sick the patient is, time on the waiting list, and distance between hospitals.^[115]

Fame, income, and insurance play no role in transplant priority.^[116] Each transplant hospital decides who it will add to its list. A past history of drug or alcohol use does not always rule someone out.^[117]

Key ethical questions:

• Consent: The United States uses an opt-in system, so people must choose to be donors. Some countries count everyone as a donor unless they opt out.^[118] Which system is more ethical?
• Trafficking: Organs are sometimes taken without valid consent or sold for money. The Declaration of Istanbul condemns organ trafficking and transplant tourism.^[119]
• Living donors: How much risk should a healthy person accept to help someone else?

What about pig organs? Scientists are testing gene-edited pig organs to ease the shortage. This is called xenotransplantation. In 2022, a patient at the University of Maryland lived for two months after receiving a pig heart.^[120] A latent pig virus, porcine cytomegalovirus, was later detected in the heart.^[121] Its exact role is uncertain.

Later analysis suggested that the virus may have contributed to inflammation in the organ and to the patient’s decline.^[122] In 2025, another patient lived 271 days with a pig kidney without needing dialysis. He later received a human kidney.^[123] In late 2025, NYU Langone Health performed the first transplant in a clinical trial of gene-edited pig kidneys.^[124]

Xenotransplants raise new concerns. These include animal welfare, the risk of animal viruses spreading to people, and consent from very sick patients. Recipients may need lifelong monitoring, which limits their right to leave the study.^[125] Read more about the pros and cons of organ donation.

Technology and Data Issues

Digital tools and new devices are changing medicine quickly. Laws and ethical guidelines are working to keep up.

19. AI in Health Care

Artificial intelligence (AI) already helps read medical scans and flag patients at risk. The FDA keeps a public list of AI-enabled medical devices authorized for sale in the United States.^[126] As of 2025, more than three out of four were for radiology, or medical imaging.^[127]

AI can make care faster. But it can also fail in ways that are hard to see. A well-known 2019 study found that a widely used health algorithm was racially biased. It predicted health care costs instead of illness. Less money had been spent on Black patients, so Black patients with the same risk score were actually sicker than White patients.^[128]

Key ethical questions:

• Bias: Will AI trained on unequal data make unequal decisions?
• Transparency: Should patients and doctors know how an AI tool works and how well it performs?^[129]
• Accountability: Who is responsible when AI makes a mistake?
• Human oversight: The American Medical Association uses the term “augmented intelligence.” It stresses that AI should support human judgment, not replace it.^[130]

20. Health Data Privacy

Your health data lives in many places. It sits in medical records, fitness trackers, health apps, and DNA test kits. Not all of it has the same protection.

In the United States, HIPAA protects health data held by health plans, most health care providers, and their business associates.^[131] It generally does not protect health information on your personal phone or tablet.^[132]

In 2024, the Federal Trade Commission updated its Health Breach Notification Rule. Many health apps and connected devices that fall outside HIPAA must now tell users, and the FTC, after a breach of identifiable health data.^[133]

A major test came in 2025. The DNA testing company 23andMe filed for bankruptcy. California’s attorney general reminded customers that they could ask the company to delete their genetic data.^[134] A judge later approved the company’s sale to a nonprofit led by its co-founder.^[135]

Key ethical questions:

• Who should control your health data: you, your doctor, or the company that collects it?
• Should companies be allowed to sell or share health data for profit?
• Can “anonymous” genetic data stay anonymous?^[67]

21. Brain Implants and Neuroethics

Neuroethics is a field that studies the ethical, legal, and social questions raised by brain science.^[136]

Brain-computer interfaces are one reason the field is growing fast. These devices read signals from the brain and turn them into actions. In 2024, UC Davis Health reported on a brain implant for a man with ALS. It let him “speak” through a computer with up to 97 percent accuracy.^[137] That same year, the company Neuralink announced its first human implant.^[138]

Key ethical questions:

• Mental privacy: Brain data could reveal very personal information. NIH neuroethics principles call for protecting the privacy of neural data.^[139] In 2024, Colorado added neural data to the sensitive data protected by state privacy law.^[140] California and Montana passed similar protections.^[141][142]
• Identity: If a device changes mood or behavior, who is really in control?
• Consent: People with paralysis may feel they have no other option. Can they freely weigh the risks of an experimental implant?

22. Human Enhancement

Most medicine aims to treat disease. Enhancement aims to improve normal abilities. In 2003, the President’s Council on Bioethics described enhancement as using biotechnology to boost the “native capacities” of a healthy body and mind.^[143] In real life, the line between therapy and enhancement is often blurry.

Powered exoskeletons show both sides. In 2014, the FDA authorized the ReWalk exoskeleton. It helps some people with spinal cord injuries walk with a trained companion.^[144] Other exoskeletons help workers lift heavy loads. But many are designed around male bodies and may fit women poorly.^[145]

Enhancement shows up in other places too. Some healthy students take prescription stimulants to boost their studying before exams.^[146] In sports, gene doping is banned. It means using genes or cells to boost athletic performance rather than to treat illness.^[147]

Key ethical questions:

• Is it fair if only wealthy people can afford enhancements?
• Will people feel pressure to enhance just to keep up at school or work?
• If enhancement becomes normal, how will we treat people who choose not to enhance?

23. Nanomedicine

Nanomedicine uses nanotechnology to prevent, diagnose, and treat disease.^[148] The nanoscale runs from about 1 to 100 nanometers. A nanometer is one billionth of a meter.^[149]

Nanomedicine is already in use. Doxil, one of the best-known nano-based cancer drugs, was approved by the FDA in 1995.^[150] The mRNA COVID-19 vaccines use lipid nanoparticles, tiny “bubbles of fat” that carry mRNA into cells.^[151]

Key ethical questions:

• Safety: Nanoscale materials can behave differently from larger forms of the same material. Safety can depend on composition, size, shape, surface properties, dose, and route of exposure, so the FDA reviews these products case by case.^[152] Research on possible risks continues.^[153]
• Environment: What happens when nanomaterials end up in water and soil?
• Consent: How do you explain risks that are not yet fully known?
• Access: Will advanced treatments reach patients who cannot afford them?

Far-Future Ideas

These two ideas get a lot of attention online. Neither has ever worked in a human. They are still worth studying, because they test our ideas about identity, death, and false hope.

24. Head Transplants

A head transplant would attach a person’s head to a donor’s body. It has never been done on a living human.

In 1970, surgeon Robert White transplanted a monkey’s head onto another monkey’s body. The monkey could not move its new body. Sources report that it lived eight or nine days.^[154][155]

In 2017, surgeons Sergio Canavero and Xiaoping Ren described a practice procedure on human cadavers. Other experts said many more steps were needed before anyone could attempt it on a living patient.^[156]

Key ethical questions:

• Can someone give true informed consent to surgery with so little evidence behind it?^[155]
• Would the person who wakes up still feel like the same person?
• One donor body could provide organs to save several lives. Is it fair to use it for one risky operation?^[157]

25. Cryonics

Cryonics means preserving a body or brain at very low temperatures after death, in the hope that future science can bring the person back. In the United States, a person must first be declared legally dead.^[158] No one has ever been revived.

Cryonics is not the same as cryopreservation in medicine. Freezing sperm, eggs, and embryos is a proven technique. Frozen embryos can be thawed and used to start a pregnancy.^[159] The Society for Cryobiology is a scientific group for researchers who study life at low temperatures. It calls cryonics “speculation or hope, not science.”^[160]

Key ethical questions:

• Is it fair to sell costly services based on an unproven hope?^[161] Prices vary by provider and by type of preservation. One long-running US provider currently lists $220,000 for whole-body preservation and $80,000 for neuropreservation, which covers the brain only.^[162]
• How can anyone give informed consent to a process that has never worked?
• If revival ever became possible, what rights would a revived person have?

Key Moments in Bioethics History

Many of today’s bioethics rules came from real events. This timeline shows the milestones students most often need to know.

How to Analyze a Bioethical Issue

Teachers often ask students to choose a controversial bioethical issue and analyze its ethical concerns. A decision-making framework makes this easier.^[8] Try these six steps.

1. Turn the issue into a question: For example: “Should parents be allowed to edit an embryo’s genes to prevent disease?”
2. Get the facts: What does the science say? What is possible today, and what is not?
3. List the stakeholders: Name everyone affected, such as patients, families, doctors, future children, and society.
4. Apply the principles: Ask how each option respects autonomy, does good, avoids harm, and treats people fairly.
5. Weigh the options: Lay out the strongest arguments on each side. Look for middle-ground solutions.
6. Decide and defend: Choose the option you think is best. Explain why, and admit its weak points.

Bioethics Debate Topics

Need a topic for a debate, essay, or research paper? Start with one of these questions.

Frequently Asked Questions

Key Takeaways

• Bioethics studies moral questions in health care, medicine, research, biotechnology, and the environment.
• An issue is bioethical when it raises an ethical question in medicine, health care, or the life sciences. Some of these issues are dilemmas, where good values conflict.
• Four core principles guide many debates: autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice.
• Modern research rules grew out of abuses such as Nazi medical experiments and the Tuskegee study.
• Beginning of life issues include abortion, surrogacy, and embryo screening.
• Cloning, stem cells, GMOs, and CRISPR raise questions about consent, safety, and fairness.
• Health care issues often come down to who gets scarce care and who gets to decide.
• AI, health data, and brain implants are fast-growing areas where laws are still catching up.
• Strong bioethical reasoning weighs the facts, the stakeholders, and the principles before reaching a decision.

Key References

All sources come from .gov, .edu, and .org publishers. They include U.S. government agencies, universities, medical and scientific societies, and peer-reviewed journals. Journal papers link to free full-text versions wherever possible.

1. “What is Bioethics? Bioethics Research Library: Bioethics Resources.” Georgetown University Library. link.
2. “Bioethics and animal research. A personal perspective and a note on the contribution of Fritz Jahr.” Biological Research (PubMed Central, U.S. National Library of Medicine). link.
3. “Introduction. The Making of British Bioethics.” NCBI Bookshelf, U.S. National Library of Medicine. link.
4. “The Rise of Bioethics: A Historical Overview. Rethinking Health Care Ethics.” NCBI Bookshelf, U.S. National Library of Medicine. link.
5. “Ethics Committees and Consultation.” University of Washington Department of Bioethics and Humanities. link.
6. “Department of Bioethics.” NIH Clinical Center. link.
7. “Moral Dilemmas.” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. link.
8. “What is a decision making framework?” Penn State Agricultural and Extension Education. link.
9. “Principles of Bioethics.” University of Washington Department of Bioethics and Humanities. link.
10. “Read the Belmont Report.” HHS Office for Human Research Protections. link.
11. “Abortion.” MedlinePlus, U.S. National Library of Medicine. link.
12. “The Ethics of Abortion.” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. link.
13. “Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (slip opinion).” Supreme Court of the United States. link.
14. “Consideration of the gestational carrier: an Ethics Committee opinion (2023).” American Society for Reproductive Medicine. link.
15. “Just the Facts: Gestational Carrier Care in the United States.” American Society for Reproductive Medicine. link.
16. “Ethical considerations on surrogacy.” Human Reproduction (PubMed Central, U.S. National Library of Medicine). link.
17. “In vitro fertilization (IVF).” MedlinePlus, U.S. National Library of Medicine. link.
18. “Press release: The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2010.” NobelPrize.org. link.
19. “ART Surveillance.” Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. link.
20. “Preimplantation Genetic Testing (patient fact sheet).” ReproductiveFacts.org, American Society for Reproductive Medicine. link.
21. “Use of preimplantation genetic testing for polygenic disorders (PGT-P): an Ethics Committee opinion (2026).” American Society for Reproductive Medicine. link.
22. “Designer Babies? The Ethical and Regulatory Implications of Polygenic Embryo Screening.” Petrie-Flom Center, Harvard Law School. link.
23. “Disposition of unclaimed embryos: an Ethics Committee opinion (2021).” American Society for Reproductive Medicine. link.
24. “Creeping Personhood: Analyzing the Impact of Alabama Supreme Court’s Decision on IVF.” O’Neill Institute, Georgetown University Law Center. link.
25. “Mitochondrial disease prevented with donated genes.” NPR. link.
26. “Advisory on Legal Restrictions on the Use of Mitochondrial Replacement Techniques to Introduce Donor Mitochondria into Reproductive Cells Intended for Transfer into a Human Recipient.” U.S. Food and Drug Administration. link.
27. “Cloning Fact Sheet.” National Human Genome Research Institute. link.
28. “Human Reproductive Cloning: Proposed Activities and Regulatory Context.” National Academies Press (NCBI Bookshelf). link.
29. “Stem Cell Basics.” National Institutes of Health. link.
30. “Ethics of Stem Cell Research.” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. link.
31. “The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2012: Popular information.” NobelPrize.org. link.
32. “Important Patient and Consumer Information About Regenerative Medicine Therapies.” U.S. Food and Drug Administration. link.
33. “FDA Approves First Mesenchymal Stromal Cell Therapy to Treat Steroid-refractory Acute Graft-versus-host Disease.” U.S. Food and Drug Administration. link.
34. “Controversial New Guidelines Would Allow Experiments On More Mature Human Embryos.” NPR. link.
35. “Guidelines.” International Society for Stem Cell Research. link.
36. “Eugenics and Scientific Racism.” National Human Genome Research Institute. link.
37. “The Supreme Court Ruling That Led To 70,000 Forced Sterilizations.” NPR. link.
38. “Letter from Dr. Harry H. Laughlin to Dr. Carl Schneider.” United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, Experiencing History. link.
39. “Euthanasia Program and Aktion T4.” United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. link.
40. “Polygenic Embryo Screening: Ethical and Legal Considerations.” The Hastings Center. link.
41. “Science and History of GMOs and Other Food Modification Processes.” U.S. Food and Drug Administration. link.
42. “Recent Trends in GE Adoption.” USDA Economic Research Service. link.
43. “Genetically Engineered Crops: Experiences and Prospects.” National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. link.
44. “Establishing the National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard.” U.S. Department of Agriculture. link.
45. “Bowman v. Monsanto Co.” Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School. link.
46. “Animal Health and Welfare. Animal Biotechnology: Science-Based Concerns.” National Academies Press (NCBI Bookshelf). link.
47. “AquAdvantage Salmon.” U.S. Food and Drug Administration. link.
48. “Gene-Drive Modified Organisms Are Not Ready to Be Released Into Environment.” National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. link.
49. “What are genome editing and CRISPR-Cas9?” MedlinePlus Genetics, U.S. National Library of Medicine. link.
50. “The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 2020: Popular information.” NobelPrize.org. link.
51. “FDA Approves First Gene Therapies to Treat Patients with Sickle Cell Disease.” U.S. Food and Drug Administration. link.
52. “World’s First Patient Treated with Personalized CRISPR Gene Editing Therapy at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia.” Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia. link.
53. “Infant with rare, incurable disease is first to successfully receive personalized gene therapy treatment.” National Institutes of Health. link.
54. “Chinese Researcher Who Created Gene-Edited Babies Sentenced To 3 Years In Prison.” NPR. link.
55. “Third International Summit on Human Genome Editing: Expanding Capabilities, Participation, and Access: Proceedings of a Workshop in Brief.” National Academies Press (NCBI Bookshelf). link.
56. “What are the Ethical Concerns of Genome Editing?” National Human Genome Research Institute. link.
57. “CGT Access Model Frequently Asked Questions.” Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. link.
58. “How is Newborn Screening Done?” Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. link.
59. “In Pioneering Study, Gene Technology Outperforms Standard Newborn Screening Tests.” Columbia University Irving Medical Center. link.
60. “BabySeq 2 aims to bring equity to newborn genomic sequencing.” Boston Children’s Hospital. link.
61. “Who should decide? The Complex Ethics of Pediatric Genome Sequencing.” National Human Genome Research Institute. link.
62. “The Promise and Perils of Next-Generation DNA Sequencing at Birth.” National Academies Press (NCBI Bookshelf). link.
63. “Genetic Discrimination.” National Human Genome Research Institute. link.
64. “What is precision medicine?” MedlinePlus Genetics, U.S. National Library of Medicine. link.
65. “Overview and Core Values.” All of Us Research Program, National Institutes of Health. link.
66. “NIH’s All of Us Research Program is now the largest integrated genomics and health database in the world.” National Institutes of Health. link.
67. “Privacy in Genomics.” National Human Genome Research Institute. link.
68. “Diversity in Genomic Research.” National Human Genome Research Institute. link.
69. “The Nuremberg Code.” United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. link.
70. “The Untreated Syphilis Study at Tuskegee Timeline.” Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. link.
71. “Effects on Research: The U.S. Public Health Service Untreated Syphilis Study at Tuskegee.” Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. link.
72. “45 CFR 46.116: General requirements for informed consent.” Electronic Code of Federal Regulations, National Archives. link.
73. “Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) and Protection of Human Subjects in Clinical Trials.” U.S. Food and Drug Administration. link.
74. “The Ethics of Research Related to Healthcare in Developing Countries.” Nuffield Council on Bioethics. link.
75. “Biorepository.” National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences Toolkit, NIH. link.
76. “The NIH-Lacks Family Agreement.” National Institutes of Health. link.
77. “The Legacy of Henrietta Lacks.” Johns Hopkins Medicine. link.
78. “Lacks v. Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc.: An Extraordinary Event from More than 70 Years Ago That Led to a Lawsuit, Resulting in a Settlement.” Food and Drug Law Institute. link.
79. “Havasupai Tribe v. the Arizona Board of Regents (2008).” Embryo Project Encyclopedia, Arizona State University. link.
80. “Moore v. Regents of the University of California (1990).” Embryo Project Encyclopedia, Arizona State University. link.
81. “Why Animals are Used in Research.” National Institutes of Health. link.
82. “NIH to prioritize human-based research technologies.” National Institutes of Health. link.
83. “Animal Use Alternatives (3Rs).” USDA National Agricultural Library. link.
84. “9 CFR 1.1: Definitions.” Electronic Code of Federal Regulations, National Archives. link.
85. “PHS Policy on Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals.” National Institutes of Health. link.
86. “Roadmap to Reducing Animal Testing in Preclinical Safety Studies.” U.S. Food and Drug Administration. link.
87. “FDA Announces Plan to Phase Out Animal Testing Requirement for Monoclonal Antibodies and Other Drugs.” U.S. Food and Drug Administration. link.
88. “FDA Achieves Year 1 Goals in Reducing Animal Testing in Drug Development.” U.S. Food and Drug Administration. link.
89. “Dual-Use Research.” NIH Office of Intramural Research. link.
90. “The controversy over H5N1 transmissibility research: An opportunity to define a practical response to a global threat.” Human Vaccines and Immunotherapeutics (PubMed Central, U.S. National Library of Medicine). link.
91. “The H5N1 Moratorium Controversy and Debate.” mBio, American Society for Microbiology. link.
92. “Improving the Safety and Security of Biological Research.” The White House. link.
93. “Trump Administration Releases New Government-Wide Policy to End Dangerous High-Risk Research.” U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. link.
94. “AI Tools Can Enhance U.S. Biosecurity; Monitoring and Mitigation Will Be Needed to Protect Against Misuse.” National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. link.
95. “AI designs a novel E. coli killer.” Stanford Report, Stanford University. link.
96. “A new report warns of serious risks from mirror life.” Stanford Report, Stanford University. link.
97. “Income, Poverty and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2025.” U.S. Census Bureau. link.
98. “Rapid Expert Consultation on Crisis Standards of Care for the COVID-19 Pandemic.” National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. link.
99. “Civil Rights and COVID-19.” HHS Office for Civil Rights. link.
100. “Ageing.” United Nations. link.
101. “Dementia, Decision Making, and Quality of Life.” AMA Journal of Ethics. link.
102. “Advance Care Planning: Advance Directives for Health Care.” National Institute on Aging. link.
103. “Your Rights and Protections as a Nursing Home Resident.” Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. link.
104. “About Abuse of Older Persons.” Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. link.
105. “Dementia Caregiving as a Public Health Strategy.” Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. link.
106. “Physician-Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia in the Intensive Care Unit: A Dialogue on Core Ethical Issues.” Critical Care Medicine (PubMed Central, U.S. National Library of Medicine). link.
107. “Comparative legal and bioethical perspectives on euthanasia and assisted suicide: a systematic review of European frameworks.” BMC Medical Ethics (PubMed Central, U.S. National Library of Medicine). link.
108. “Report: Death with Dignity Act prescriptions continued rise in 2025.” Oregon Health Authority. link.
109. “New York Enacts Medical Aid in Dying.” Petrie-Flom Center, Harvard Law School. link.
110. “New Laws Impacting Public Health to Take Effect in 2026.” Illinois Department of Public Health. link.
111. “Judge declines to block Illinois’ medical aid in dying law ahead of Sept. 12 start.” WGLT, Illinois State University public radio. link.
112. “New York State Department of Health Announces Historic Medical Aid in Dying Law Takes Effect in New York State.” New York State Department of Health. link.
113. “Physician-Assisted Suicide: AMA Code of Medical Ethics Opinion 5.7.” American Medical Association. link.
114. “Organ Donation Statistics.” Health Resources and Services Administration, OrganDonor.gov. link.
115. “Matching Donors and Recipients.” Health Resources and Services Administration, OrganDonor.gov. link.
116. “How We Match Organs.” United Network for Organ Sharing. link.
117. “Kidney Transplant Evaluation and Listing.” United Network for Organ Sharing. link.
118. “Opt Out Policies Increase Organ Donation.” Stanford SPARQ, Stanford University. link.
119. “The Declaration of Istanbul on Organ Trafficking and Transplant Tourism.” Declaration of Istanbul Custodian Group. link.
120. “Lessons Learned from World’s First Successful Transplant of Genetically-Modified Pig Heart into Human Patient.” University of Maryland School of Medicine. link.
121. “Study Sheds Light on Death of Pig-Heart Transplant Patient.” University of Maryland, Baltimore. link.
122. “Clinical Pig Heart Xenotransplantation: Where Do We Go From Here?” Transplant International (PubMed Central, U.S. National Library of Medicine). link.
123. “Patient Who Received Pig Kidney Becomes First To Progress to Human Kidney Transplant.” Harvard Medical School. link.
124. “First Gene-Edited Pig Kidney Transplant Clinical Trial Begins at NYU Langone Health.” NYU Langone Health. link.
125. “Xenotransplantation: Three Areas of Concern.” The Hastings Center. link.
126. “Artificial Intelligence-Enabled Medical Devices.” U.S. Food and Drug Administration. link.
127. “FDA Outlines Regulatory Pathways and Emerging Challenges for AI-Enabled Radiology Devices.” RSNA Daily Bulletin, Radiological Society of North America. link.
128. “Dissecting racial bias in an algorithm used to manage the health of populations.” Science (eScholarship, University of California). link.
129. “Health Care Artificial Intelligence Code of Conduct.” National Academy of Medicine. link.
130. “Augmented intelligence in medicine.” American Medical Association. link.
131. “Covered Entities and Business Associates.” U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. link.
132. “Protecting the Privacy and Security of Your Health Information When Using Your Personal Cell Phone or Tablet.” U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. link.
133. “Complying with FTC’s Health Breach Notification Rule.” Federal Trade Commission. link.
134. “Attorney General Bonta Urgently Issues Consumer Alert for 23andMe Customers.” California Office of the Attorney General. link.
135. “Judge OKs sale of 23andMe to a nonprofit led by its founder.” NPR. link.
136. “Neuroethics Working Group.” NIH BRAIN Initiative. link.
137. “New brain-computer interface allows man with ALS to speak again.” UC Davis Health. link.
138. “What to know about Elon Musk’s Neuralink, which put an implant into a human brain.” NPR. link.
139. “Neuroethics Guiding Principles for the NIH BRAIN Initiative.” NIH BRAIN Initiative. link.
140. “HB24-1058: Protect Privacy of Biological Data.” Colorado General Assembly. link.
141. “Governor signs Senator Becker’s first-in-the-nation legislation on neurorights.” California State Senate. link.
142. “Senate Bill 163 (2025): Including Neurotechnology Data in the Scope of the Genetic Information Privacy Act.” Montana Legislature. link.
143. “Beyond Therapy: Biotechnology and the Pursuit of Happiness, Chapter 1.” President’s Council on Bioethics (Georgetown University Bioethics Archive). link.
144. “De Novo Classification Request DEN130034: ReWalk.” U.S. Food and Drug Administration. link.
145. “Exoskeletons and Occupational Health Equity.” CDC National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. link.
146. “Smart and Smarter Drugs.” University of Michigan Department of Psychology. link.
147. “What is cell or gene doping?” U.S. Anti-Doping Agency. link.
148. “Applications of Nanotechnology.” National Nanotechnology Initiative. link.
149. “Nanotechnology: Over a Decade of Progress and Innovation.” U.S. Food and Drug Administration. link.
150. “Cancer Nano-Therapies in the Clinic and Clinical Trials.” National Cancer Institute. link.
151. “COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines: mRNA Vaccine Development.” National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. link.
152. “FDA’s Approach to Regulation of Nanotechnology Products.” U.S. Food and Drug Administration. link.
153. “Nanomaterials.” National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. link.
154. “The Seminal and Sometimes Weird Science of Dr. Robert White.” University of St. Thomas. link.
155. “Surgical, ethical, and psychosocial considerations in human head transplantation.” International Journal of Surgery (PubMed Central, U.S. National Library of Medicine). link.
156. “Is it time to perform the first human head transplant? Comment on the CSA paper by Ren, Canavero, and colleagues.” Surgical Neurology International (PubMed Central, U.S. National Library of Medicine). link.
157. “The First Human Body Transplant: Ethical and Legal Considerations.” Petrie-Flom Center, Harvard Law School. link.
158. “Second Chance with Cryogenics.” University of Texas Medical Branch, Medical Discovery News. link.
159. “Embryo Freezing (Cryopreservation).” Cleveland Clinic. link.
160. “Society for Cryobiology Position Statement: Cryonics (November 2018).” Society for Cryobiology. link.
161. “The Frozen-Undead: Ethical Implications of Suspended Animation and Cryonics.” USC Viterbi Conversations in Ethics, University of Southern California. link.
162. “Membership Pricing and Dues.” Alcor Life Extension Foundation. link.
163. “The Story of Dolly.” Ask A Biologist, Arizona State University. link.
164. “A science trailblazer retires: Stem cell researcher James Thomson’s legacy changed the future of biology.” University of Wisconsin-Madison News. link.
165. “Human Genome Project.” National Human Genome Research Institute. link.