A fascinating topic that has not been recently revisited by bioethics is the ethics of human experimentation within the military context, in keeping with the pace of modern technology development. Many research innovations stem from military research, where emerging technologies are first applied in the field then eventually repurposed for civilian contexts. This commentary presents an ethical framework for the usage of military personnel as research subjects, within the context of modern military research such as epigenetic technology development in soldiers. Tensions are raised between existing military versus civilian bioethical frameworks for human experimentation and compared to risk-benefit assessments within and beyond the military context. A harmonized ethical framework is proposed for the use of research subjects within the military. The pace of modern scientific research, particularly in genomics, poses new ethical considerations of genetic profiling, consent, risk, and data privacy that urges a timely revisit of military bioethics.

This research is part of the Doctoral thesis "Perceptions of university professors on Health Promotion and Sustainability: a research proposal based on Health Promoting Universities (HPU) / World Health Organization (WHO) ", University Fernando Pessoa (UFP) / Porto - Portugal, authored by Ivaní Nadir Carlotto: (1) Background: Universities are essential institutions for health promotion (HP). Bioethics, as a transversal discipline, seeks to analyse and systematise these values in an ethical way, strengthening the synergy between health and HP. Ecological models are a possibility to develop health actions in a holistic, sustainable and salutogenic way, stimulating positive aspects related to ethics, well-being and quality of life; (2) Methods: Exploratory-descriptive methodology and quantitative-qualitative approach. Sample: Teachers from 9 higher education institutions (HEI), random sample, probabilistic for convenience, CI = 95%, n = 1400 persons; (3) Results: Production of 6 main components through Factorial Analysis categorized and interpreted by Qualitative Content Analysis and MAXQDA® software; (4) Conclusions: Universities function as research and learning venues to strengthen HP's activities. Bioethics and HP aim to build qualified actions in health, to defend and promoting well-being, quality of life, equity, inclusion, sustainability and social justice, with the proper conceptual clarity that distinguishes it.

Over the last decade, advances in our understanding about the genetic architecture of complex traits and common diseases, have increased our ability to perform susceptibility genetic testing for diseases in asymptomatic individuals. These technological developments raise complex ethical, legal and social considerations. Here we discuss a series of ethical issues associated with susceptibility genetic testing for Alzheimer's and Parkinson's disease. These include, amongst others, informed consent, disclosure of results and unexpected findings, mandatory screening, privacy and confidentiality, and stigma and genetic discrimination. As knowledge of the genetic basis of these diseases continues growing, and as genetic testing becomes more widespread, we anticipate that it will become increasingly important for scientists and clinicians to engage in the conversation about the ethical, social and policy implications of these technologies.

Recent dramatic reductions in the timeframe in which genomic sequencing can deliver results means its application in time-sensitive screening programs such as newborn screening (NBS) is becoming a reality. As genomic NBS (gNBS) programs are developed around the world, there is an increasing need to address the ethical and social issues that such initiatives raise. This study therefore aimed to explore the Australian public’s perspectives and values regarding key gNBS characteristics and preferences for service delivery. We recruited English-speaking members of the Australian public over 18 years of age via social media; 75 people aged 23-72 participated in one of 15 focus groups. Participants were generally supportive of introducing genomic sequencing into newborn screening, with several stating that adoption of such revolutionary and beneficial technology was a moral obligation. Participants consistently highlighted receiving an early diagnosis as the leading benefit, which was frequently linked to the potential for early treatment and intervention, or access to other forms of assistance, such as peer support. Informing parents about the test during pregnancy was considered important. This study provides insights into the Australian public’s views and preferences to inform the delivery of a gNBS program in the Australian context.

Ethical considerations regarding our treatment of animals have gained strength, leading to legislation and a societal focus across various disciplines. This is a subject of study within curricula related to agri-food sciences. The aim was to determine the perceptions of agronomy university students concerning animal welfare in livestock production systems. A survey was conducted to encompass various aspects, from participants' sociodemographic attributes to their attitudes and behaviors regarding animal welfare and the consumption of animal products. Statistical analysis, performed using R software, delved into the associations between participants' characteristics and their perspectives on the ethical, bioethical, and legal dimensions of animal welfare. Associations between demographic factors and ethical viewpoints among students were identified. Gender differences emerged in animal treatment perceptions, while rural and urban environments impacted perspectives on various animals. Bioethical considerations revealed distinctive disparities based on gender and education in concerns for animal welfare, value perceptions, evaluations of animal behaviors, and opinions on animal research. It is crucial to distinguish between animal welfare and ethical considerations arising from coexisting with sentient beings capable of experiencing suffering. Ethical theories provide a lens through which we perceive our obligations toward animals. The responsibility to ensure animal welfare is firmly rooted in recognizing that animals, like humans, experience pain and physical suffering. Consequently, actions causing unjustified suffering or mistreatment, particularly for entertainment purposes, are considered morally unacceptable.

The right to live with dignity during the final stages of existence, enshrined in national and supranational Charters of Rights, represents a significant step towards humanizing medicine and is integral to the right to health. Palliative Care, rooted in health, dignity, and therapeutic self-determination, has emerged as a fundamental human right and a moral imperative within health systems. It seeks to alleviate suffering, emphasizing the holistic well-being of patients with life-limiting illnesses. This paper provides a comprehensive global perspective on Palliative Care, with special attention to its implementation in Italy. Palliative Care is a crucial dimension of care, designed to enhance the quality of life for patients suffering from progressive and incurable diseases. Despite its growing need due to an aging population and increased prevalence of chronic illnesses, still remains a significant disparity in access to these essential services worldwide. Insufficient resources, legislative constraints, and limited training for healthcare providers pose challenges to the widespread adoption of Palliative Care. In Italy, although laws have been enacted to ensure the provision of Palliative Care, its availability remains inconsistent across different regions. Financial constraints and insufficient support hinder the comprehensive dissemination of these services. Recognizing the significance of Palliative Care, the Catholic Church also endorses its implementation as a response to human suffering and an approach to end-of-life care. Efforts to strengthen Palliative Care are critical to meeting the rising demand and ensuring access to compassionate and dignified care for all individuals in need. Through legislative advancements and adequate resources, Italy can make significant strides in advancing the provision of Palliative Care.

Background: Little is known about the decisional background of choosing an appropriate disease model. Therefore, this paper aims, (1) to identify a spectrum of reasons for choosing between animal and non-animal disease models and (2) provides an ethical analysis of these reasons. Methods: 13 researchers from basic and preclinical research were interviewed, the interviews were analyzed qualitatively and the results were categorized. The ethical analysis was based on the principlism approach and a value judgement model. Results: This paper presents 66 reasons why researchers use animal (41 %) or alternative, non-animal disease models (59 %). Most of the reasons were be assigned to the work environment (29 reasons) and scientific standards (22 reasons). Other reasons were assigned to personal attitudes (11 reasons) and animal welfare (4 reasons). Qualitative relevant normative differences are presented in the ethical analysis. Even if few reasons can be rejected outright from an ethical point of view, there are good reasons to give some more weight than others. Conclusions: The spectrum of reasons and its ethical assessment provide a framework for reflection for researchers who may have to choose between animal models and (investing in) alternatives. This can help to reflect on and justify decisions.