证据审查机制初探

近年来学界对于证据规则的研究已经相当深入，对于证据审查的相关机制却疏于关注。证据审查包括证据筛选和证据评价两个相对独立的环节。英美法系国家证据审查的“分离模式”与大陆法系国家证据审查的“融合模式”各有优劣。我国证据审查模式选择的基本思路是将证据筛选和证据评价适度分离、对证据筛选活动进行诉讼化改造以及完善证据评价机制。     

生命伦理学与21世纪的法律——西方生命伦理立法概览

生命伦理学与法学交叉领域研究近几十年来受到西方国家的重视，甚至被当作21世纪法律的核心。各国围绕生命的不同阶段和状态展开的一系列立法举措与法学研究使公民在生死、器官移植、基因信息与检测等方面的权利得到了保障。介绍与分析具有代表性的生命伦理立法例，说明涉及生命伦理的法律问题应当作为一个体系加强研究，借此为我国的生命伦理立法与法学研究提供有益的借鉴与启示。     

6个miniSTR基因座荧光标记复合扩增的遗传多态性

目的评价6个miniSTR基因座在DNA高度降解检材中的法医学应用价值,并调查广东汉族人群6个miniSTR基因座的遗传多态性。方法采用两个复合扩增PCR体系、四色荧光标记及毛细管电泳技术,对D1S1677,D2S441,D4S2364,D10S1248,D14S1434,D22S1045基因座进行基因型检测。结果6个miniSTR基因座均获得了清晰的基因型分型结果,扩增片段均小于120bp,分别检出7、7、5、8、8、7个等位基因和14、11、11、19、12、14种基因型,基因型分布均符合Hardy-Weinberg平衡。6个miniSTR基因座在广东汉族群体的个人识别率和非父排除率分别依次为0.863、0.895、0.792、0.894、0.814、0.904和0.392、0.360、0.353、0.568、0.378、0.513。10例IdentifilerTM试剂盒未能正确分型的高度降解DNA样本,采用6个miniSTR基因座复合扩增体系检测均提高了分型成功率结论6个miniSTR基因座荧光标记复合扩增体系在DNA高度降解检材的检测中具有较高的应用价值,并且在广东地区汉族群体中具有较好的遗传多态性。     

论遗传资源的获取和惠益分享的产生

遗传资源是对人类具有实际或潜在用途或价值的一类重要的生物资源,遗传资源的获取问题经历了从自由获取向限制获取的转变过程。《生物多样性公约》的通过,标志着遗传资源的获取和惠益分享国际法律规范的正式确立,而《粮食和农业植物遗传资源国际条约》则针对粮食和农业植物遗传资源的特殊性质建立了粮食和农业植物遗传资源的获取和惠益分享多边系统。     

单核苷酸多态性研究进展

单核甘酸多态性（ SNPs）是继 RFLP和微卫星多态性标记之后的新一代遗传标记系统,具有密度高、遗传稳定、分析易自动化等特点。 SNPs可通过电泳、 PCR、酶切及测序等方法检测,已广泛应用于基因作图、疾病相关性分析、群体遗传学及药物研究等领域。     

Analysis of forensic SNPs in the canine mtDNA HV1 mutational hotspot region

A 60 bp sequence variation hotspot in the canine mitochondrial DNA hypervariable region 1 was evaluated for its use in forensic investigations. Nineteen haplotypes containing 18 single nucleotide polymorphisms were observed among laboratory-generated and GenBank-derived domestic dog sequences representing five regional localities in the U.S. Samples from the different localities were highly variable with the levels of intra-population variability being similar among the populations studied. AMOVA further confirmed that there was no significant genetic structuring of the populations. Assays using these haplotypes were robust, canid specific and portend a rapid method for correctly excluding individual dogs as noncontributors of forensic evidence. Species-specificity of the primers was confirmed by means of in-tube polymerase chain reaction of human and cat DNA and in-silico assessment of the genomes of several animal species. Breed-specific fragments were not detected among the common haplotypes but there is evidence that this assay may be capable of differentiating domestic dog, wolf, and coyote sequences.     

Y-chromosomal kinship estimation for forensic familial searching: YMrCA to the rescue

The Y-chromosome can be used as an identification method to find paternally related males of the perpetrator. When a close Y-haplotype match is identified, the time to their most recent common ancestor (tMRCA) needs to be estimated to reconstruct their genealogy. To date, two mutation models and three online tMRCA calculators exist. But, they do not include individual mutation rates with multi-step changes, while ignoring hidden multiple, back or parallel modifications. To improve tMRCA estimation, we developed a user-friendly calculator, the ‘YMrCA’, including all previously mentioned mutation characteristics. Here, a case using genealogical pairs with confirmed biological kinships visualizes the good estimation performance of the YMrCA compared to the state-of-the-art. Even when genealogical pairs have equal number of mutations, the YMrCA still estimates the correct number of generations due to the inclusion of individual Y-STR mutation rates and the different mutational influencing factors.     

Yesterday's war; tomorrow's technology: peer commentary on ‘Ethical,legal, social and policy issues in the use of genomic technologies by the US military’

A recent article by Maxwell J. Mehlman and Tracy Yeheng Li, in the Journal of Law and the Biosciences, sought to examine the ethical, legal, social, and policy issues associated with the use of genetic screening and germ-line therapies (‘genomic technologies’) by the US Military. In this commentary, we will elaborate several related matters: the relationship between genetic and non-genetic screening methods, the history of selection processes and force strength, and the consequences and ethics of, as Mehlman and Li suggest, engineering enhanced soldiers. We contend, first, that the strengths of genomic testing as a method of determining enrollment in the armed forces has limited appeal, given the state of current selection methods in the US armed forces. Second, that the vagaries of genetic selection, much like other forms of selection that do not bear causally or reliably on soldier performance (such as race, gender, and sexuality), pose a systematic threat to force strength by limiting the (valuable) diversity of combat units. Third, that the idea of enhancing warfighters through germ-line interventions poses serious ethical issues in terms of the control and ownership of ‘enhancements’ when members separate from service.     

The problems of liminal states,line drawing,and false dichotomies

This commentary focuses on the tenuous line between health and disease and the conflicting characterizations of genetic predisposition that sometimes place it on one side of that line, and sometimes on the other. For example, GINA uses the line between health and disease to distinguish between, respectively, the healthy (including, those with genetic predispositions), who are shielded from discrimination, and those with ‘manifested illness,’ who are not. At the same time, some have argued that the Americans with Disabilities Act protects individuals with genetic predispositions, relying on a label akin to disability, as opposed to health, to characterize this group. Similarly, courts have described genetic predisposition as a disease of sorts to justify insurance payment for medical intervention. Attempts to fit genetic predisposition neatly into the binary world of health or illness can be problematic because this dichotomy doesn''t capture the complex continuum between those states. Some individuals reside in yet another ‘liminal’ state when they develop mild symptoms or biomarkers, placing them somewhere between genetic predisposition and actual disease manifestation. As a result, they may be unprotected under existing frameworks. Liminal states are therefore problematic not only with respect to insurance reimbursement, but in other areas as well.     

The FDA and genetic testing: improper tools for a difficult problem

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has recently issued draft guidance on how it intends to regulate laboratory-developed tests, including genetic tests. This article argues that genetic tests differ from traditional targets of FDA regulation in both product as well as industry landscape, and that the FDA''s traditional tools are ill-suited for regulating this space. While existing regulatory gaps do create risks in genetic testing, the regulatory burden of the FDA''s proposal introduces new risks for both test providers and patients that may offset the benefits. Incremental expansion of current oversight outside of the FDA can mitigate many of the risks necessitating increased oversight while avoiding the creation of new ones that could undermine this industry.