Enthusiastic portrayal of 3D bioprinting in the media: Ethical side effects.
Frederic GilbertJohn Noel Montaño ViañaCathal D O'ConnellSusan DoddsPublished in: Bioethics (2017)
There has been a surge in mass media reports extolling the potential for using three-dimensional printing of biomaterials (3D bioprinting) to treat a wide range of clinical conditions. Given that mass media is recognized as one of the most important sources of health and medical information for the general public, especially prospective patients, we report and discuss the ethical consequences of coverage of 3D bioprinting in the media. First, we illustrate how positive mass media narratives of a similar biofabricated technology, namely the Macchiarini scaffold tracheas, which was involved in lethal experimental human trials, influenced potential patient perceptions. Second, we report and analyze the positively biased and enthusiastic portrayal of 3D bioprinting in mass media. Third, we examine the lack of regulation and absence of discussion about risks associated with bioprinting technology. Fourth, we explore how media misunderstanding is dangerously misleading the narrative about the technology.
Keyphrases
- healthcare
- end stage renal disease
- public health
- human health
- endothelial cells
- chronic kidney disease
- ejection fraction
- mental health
- emergency department
- risk assessment
- newly diagnosed
- primary care
- prognostic factors
- health information
- peritoneal dialysis
- climate change
- tissue engineering
- patient reported outcomes
- electronic health record
- patient reported