Biobancos genômicos nacionais: os riscos da vigilância genética e a biossociabilidade

Publicado 2025-06-24

Abrir | Descarga
PDF (Espanhol) FLIP XML (Espanhol)
Edição
N.º 54 (2025): abril-junio
Secção
Artículos
Como Citar
Ferpozzi, H. (2025). Biobancos genômicos nacionais: os riscos da vigilância genética e a biossociabilidade. Tabula Rasa, 54, 193-215. https://doi.org/10.25058/20112742.n54.09
DOI

https://doi.org/10.25058/20112742.n54.09
Dimensions
PlumX
##citations_tittle##
Crossref
##txt_crossref##
Scopus
##txt_scopus##
Google Scholar
Europe PMC
##txt_europepmc##

Neste artigo estudam-se os riscos presentes no Programa PoblAr, o biobanco genômico da população argentina. Enquanto nas últimas décadas a sequenciação de genomas humanos esteve atravessada por preocupações éticas vinculadas, sobretudo, com a privacidade, neste trabalho retomo noções analíticas dos estudos biopolíticos e antropológicos para indagar nas dimensões epistémicas e políticas de dois riscos presentes nos biobancos genômicos nacionais: isto é, primeiro, a possibilidade de informar processos de vigilância genética empresarial e governamental exercida “desde cima”, e, segundo, a possibilidade de alimentar “desde baixo” a construção de identidades sociais e políticas excludentes ancoradas nas ontologias do natural que Rabinow denomina “biossociabilidade”. Seguindo experiências públicas e privadas internacionais, a hipótese proposta neste artigo é que esses riscos não são mutuamente excludentes, mas que suas dimensões epistémicas e políticas funcionam de maneira complementária. Assim, enquanto as diretrizes que regulam o Programa PoblAr preveem ambos os riscos, também supõem o risco de limitar as instâncias de participação pública para além da esfera de decisão especializada.

Visualizações de artigos 10 | Visitas em PDF 9

Downloads

Os dados de download ainda não estão disponíveis.
  1. Anderson, C. (2008, 23 de junio). The End of Theory: The Data Deluge Makes the Scientific Method Obsolete. Wired. https://www.wired.com/2008/06/pb-theory/
  2. Bauer, M. W. (2009). The Evolution of Public Understanding of Science—Discourse and Comparative Evidence. Science, Technology and Society, 14(2), 221–240. https://doi.org/10.1177/097172180901400202
  3. Bird, K. A. & Carlson, J. (2024). Typological thinking in human genomics research contributes to the production and prominence of scientific racism. Frontiers in Genetics, 15. https://doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2024.1345631
  4. Carballo, R., Schmally, E. & Tumin, R. (26 de enero de 2024,). 23andMe Breach Targeted Jewish and Chinese Customers, Lawsuit Says. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/26/business/23andme-hack-data.html
  5. Castel, R. (1984). La gestión de los riesgos. De la anti-psiquiatría al post-análisis. Anagrama.
  6. Castells, M. (1997). La era de la información. Economía, sociedad y cultura, vol. I. Alianza.
  7. Caulfield, T., Fullerton, S. M., Ali-Khan, S. E., Arbour, L., Burchard, E. G., Cooper, R. S., . . . Daar, A. S. (2009). Race and ancestry in biomedical research: exploring the challenges. Genome Medicine, 1(1), 8. https://doi.org/10.1186/gm8
  8. Chadwick, R. (2021). Genetic information: fundamental issues. En A. Duff (comp.) Research Handbook on Information Policy (pp. 387–399). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781789903584.00044
  9. Chow-White, P. (2012). Genomic Databases and an Emerging Digital Divide in Biotechnology. En L. Nakamura & P. Chow-White (eds.), Race After the Internet (pp. 291–309). Routledge.
  10. Chow-White, P. A. & García-Sancho, M. (2012). Bidirectional Shaping and Spaces of Convergence: Interactions between Biology and Computing from the First DNA Sequencers to Global Genome Databases. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 37(1), 124-164. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243910397969
  11. Costa, F. (2017). Omnes et singulatim en el nuevo orden informacional. Gubernamentalidad algorítmica y vigilancia genética. Poliética. Revista de Ética e Filosofía Política, 5(1), 40–73. https://doi.org/10.23925/poliética.v5i1.36356
  12. Couldry, N. & Mejías, U. (2022). El costo de la conexión: cómo los datos colonizan la vida humana y se la apropian para el capitalismo. Godot.
  13. Delvitto, A., Petino Zappala, M. A., Ocampo Mallou, C., Pallitto, N. & Lavagnino, N. J. (2024). Miradas críticas a los Biobancos de Datos Genómicos desde el Sur II: hacia una negación de la fundamentación ética del Programa Nacional de Referencia y Biobanco Genómico de la Población Argentina (PoblAr). Revista Colombiana de Bioética, 19(2), e4328. https://doi.org/10.18270/rcb.v19i2.4328
  14. Foucault, M. (2006). Seguridad, territorio, población. Fondo de Cultura Económica.
  15. Fox, K. (2020). The illusion of inclusion — the “All of Us” research program and Indigenous peoples’ DNA. New England Journal of Medicine, 383(5), 411–413. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmp1915987
  16. Keller, E. F. (2002). El siglo del gen: Cien Años de pensamiento genético. Ediciones Península.
  17. Keller, E. F. (2003). Making Sense of Life: explaining biological development with models, metaphors, and machines. Harvard University Press.
  18. Fujimura, J. H. & Rajagopalan, R. (2010). Different differences: The use of ‘genetic ancestry’ versus race in biomedical human genetic research. Social Studies of Science, 41(1), 5–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312710379170
  19. Fuller, S. (2018). Post-Truth: Knowledge as a Power Game. Anthem Press.
  20. García-Sancho, M. (2006). The rise and fall of the idea of genetic information (1948-2006). Genomics Society and Policy, 2(3). https://doi.org/10.1186/1746-5354-2-3-16
  21. Gilbert, W. (1991) Towards a paradigm shift in biology. Nature 349, 99. https://doi.org/10.1038/349099a0
  22. Inda, J. X. (2005). Analytics of the Modern: An Introduction. En J. Inda (Ed.). Anthropologies of modernity: Foucault, Governmentality, and Life Politics (pp. 1-20). Wiley-Blackwell.
  23. Kay, L. (2000). Who Wrote the Book of Life?: A History of the Genetic Code. Stanford University Press.
  24. Kelly, K. (28 de junio de 2008). The Google Way of Science. The Technium. https://kk.org/thetechnium/the-google-way/
  25. Kovanda, A., Zimani, A. N. & Peterlin, B. (2021). How to design a national genomic project-a systematic review of active projects. Human Genomics, 15(1), 20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40246-021-00315-6
  26. Kosinski, M., Stillwell, D. & Graepel, T. (2013). Private traits and attributes are predictable from digital records of human behavior. PNAS Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 110(15), 5802–5805. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1218772110
  27. Lenoir, T. (1998). Shaping biomedicine as an information science. En M. E. Bowden, T. B. Hahn & R. V. Williams (Eds.), Proceedings of the 1998 Conference on the History and Heritage of Science Information Systems (pp. 27–45). Information Today.
  28. Lima, N. S., Petino Zappala, M. A., Delvitto, A., Romero, M. A. & Pallitto, N. (2023). De la salud colectiva a la medicina «personalizada»: desafíos bioéticos de la evaluación genética preimplantatoria desde la perspectiva norte-sur. Salud Colectiva, 19, e4481. https://doi.org/10.18294/sc.2023.4481
  29. Lunshof, J. E., Chadwick, R., Vorhaus, D. B. & Church, G. M. (2008). From genetic privacy to open consent. Nature Reviews. Genetics, 9(5), 406–411. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg2360
  30. Malin, B. & Sweeney, L. (2004). How (not) to protect genomic data privacy in a distributed network: using trail re-identification to evaluate and design anonymity protection systems. Journal of Biomedical Informatics, 37(3), 179–192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbi.2004.04.005
  31. McKusick, V. A. & Ruddle, F. H. (1987). A new discipline, a new name, a new journal. Genomics, 1(1), 1–2. https://doi.org/10.1016/0888-7543(87)90098-x
  32. Mitchell, R. & Waldby, C. (2010). National Biobanks: Clinical Labor, Risk Production, and the Creation of Biovalue. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 35(3), 330–355. http://www.jstor.org/stable/27862465
  33. Moffitt, B. (2023). El ascenso global del populismo. Performance, estilo político y representación. Prometeo
  34. Molla, R. (13 de diciembre de 2019). Genetic testing is an inexact science with real consequences. Vox. https://www.vox.com/recode/2019/12/13/20978024/genetic-testing-dna-consequences-23andme-ancestry
  35. Novas, C. (2006). The Political Economy of hope: patients’ organizations, science and biovalue. BioSocieties, 1(3), 289–305. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1745855206003024
  36. Panofsky, A., & Donovan, J. (2019). Genetic ancestry testing among white nationalists: From identity repair to citizen science. Social Studies of Science, 49(5), 653–681. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312719861434
  37. Panofsky, A., Dasgupta, K. & Iturriaga, N. (2021). How White nationalists mobilize genetics: From genetic ancestry and human biodiversity to counterscience and metapolitics. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 175(2), 387–398. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajpa.24150
  38. Rabeharisoa, V. & Callon, M. (2002). La participación de las asociaciones de pacientes en la investigación. Revista Internacional de Ciencias Sociales, 54(1)/171, 57-65.
  39. Rabinow, P. (1996). Artificiality and Enlightenment: From Sociobiology to Biosociality. Essays on the Anthropology of Reason (pp. 91–111). Princeton University Press.
  40. Regalado, A. (11 de febrero de 2019). More than 26 million people have taken an at-home ancestry test. MIT Technology Review. https://www.technologyreview.com/2019/02/11/103446/more-than-26-million-people-have-taken-an-at-home-ancestry-test/
  41. Rodríguez, P. (2010). Episteme posmoderna y sociedades de control. Deleuze, heredero de Foucault. Margens, 5, 23–40. https://periodicos.ufpa.br/index.php/revistamargens/article/view/2808
  42. Rodríguez, P. (2018). Gubernamentalidad algorítmica: Sobre las formas de subjetivación en la sociedad de los metadatos. Barda, 4(6), 14–35. https://www.cefc.org.ar/assets/files/rodriguez.pdf
  43. Rodriguez-Medina, L. (2021). De la posverdad al populismo epistémico: una visión desde los estudios de ciencia, tecnología y sociedad (CTS). Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Políticas y Sociales, 66(243). https://doi.org/10.22201/fcpys.2448492xe.2021.243.76053
  44. Roth, W. D., Yaylacı, Ş., Jaffe, K. & Richardson, L. (2020). Do genetic ancestry tests increase racial essentialism? Findings from a randomized controlled trial. PLoS ONE, 15(1), e0227399. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0227399
  45. Rouvroy, A. & Berns, T. (2018). Gobernabilidad algorítmica y perspectivas de emancipación: ¿lo dispar como condición de individuación mediante la relación? Ecuador Debate, 104, 124–147. http://hdl.handle.net/10469/15424
  46. Ruderman, A., Paschetta, C., González-José, R. & Ramallo, V. (2020). Origen étnico y ancestría genética, ¿qué lugar tienen en la práctica médica en Argentina? Revista Argentina de Antropología Biológica, 22(2), 020. https://doi.org/10.24215/18536387e020
  47. Shahvisi, A. (19 de marzo de 2019). Tropicality and abjection: What do we really mean by “Neglected Tropical Diseases”? Developing World Bioethics, 19(4), 224-234. https://doi.org/10.1111/dewb.12223
  48. Spiegel, D. (2022, 25 de enero). One of Google’s earliest genetic experiments, 23andMe, paid off — here’s what will make or break its future. CNBC. https://www.cnbc.com/2022/01/25/how-one-of-googles-earliest-genetic-experiments-23andme-paid-off.html
  49. Stiegler, B. (2017). Automatic Society 1: The Future of Work. Polity Press.
  50. Taussig, K. S., Rapp R. & Heath, D. (2005). Flexible Eugenics: Technologies of the Self in the Age of Genetics. En: J. X. Inda (Ed.). Anthropologies of modernity: Foucault, Governmentality, and Life Politics (pp. 194-212). Wiley-Blackwell.
  51. Tavani, H.T. (2003). Genomic Research and Data-mining Technology: Implications for Personal Privacy and Informed Consent. Ethics and Information Technology, 6(1), 15–28.
  52. Tsosie, K. S., Fox, K. & Yracheta, J. M. (2021). Genomics data: the broken promise is to Indigenous people. Nature, 591(7851), 529. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-00758-w
  53. Van Baren-Nawrocka, J. (2013). The bioinformatics of genetic origins: how identities become embedded in the tools and practices of bioinformatics. Life Sciences Society and Policy, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/2195-7819-9-7
  54. Vedder, A. (1999). KDD: The challenge to individualism. Ethics and Information Technology 1, 275–281. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010016102284
  55. Zwart, H. (2009). Genomics and identity: the bioinformatisation of human life. Medicine Health Care and Philosophy, 12(2), 125–136. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-009-9187-x
Tutoriales

Autores:

¿Cómo enviar un artículo?

Par evaluador:

¿Cómo evaluar un artículo?

Informações

Palavras-chave

QR

Número Atual

Más leídos en los últimos 30 días

Sistema OJS 3.4.0.5 - Metabiblioteca |