Socio-ethical analysis of equity in access to nutrigenomics interventions for obesity prevention: a focus group study.

The goal of nutrigenomics is to develop nutritional interventions targeted to individual genetic make-up. Obesity is a prime candidate for nutrigenomics research. Personalized approaches to prevention of diseases associated with obesity may be available in the near future. Nevertheless, in the context of limited resources, access to a nutrigenomics personalized health service raises questions around equity. Using focus groups, the present qualitative research study provides empirical data on ethical concerns and values surrounding the nutrigenomics-guided personalized nutrition for obesity prevention. Eight focus groups were convened including 27 healthy individuals and 21 individuals who self-identified as obese or at risk of obesity. The transcripts of the focus group were analyzed according to the qualitative method of grounded theory. Responsibility, reciprocity, and solidarity emerged as the key ethical criteria perceived by the respondents to be significant in terms of how health professionals should determine access to personalized nutrition services. Still, exclusion of individuals from specific nutrigenomic services is likely to conflict with the imperatives of medical deontology and contemporary social consensus. The representation of equity in this paper is novel: it considers the intersection of nutrigenomics and personalized nutritional interventions specifically in the context of limited public resources for health services.

[1]  B. Godard,et al.  Evidence-based management of nutrigenomics expectations and ELSIs. , 2007, Pharmacogenomics.

[2]  R. Elliott,et al.  Nutrigenomic approaches for obesity research , 2007, Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity.

[3]  T. Lang,et al.  Overcoming policy cacophony on obesity: an ecological public health framework for policymakers , 2007, Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity.

[4]  S. Holm,et al.  Obesity interventions and ethics , 2007, Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity.

[5]  Laura Johnson,et al.  How Many Interviews Are Enough? , 2006 .

[6]  C. Bouchard,et al.  Genetics and Obesity: What Does It Mean to the Clinician? , 2005 .

[7]  K. Ball,et al.  Socioeconomic status and weight change in adults: a review. , 2005, Social science & medicine.

[8]  Wouter Poortinga,et al.  Trust in Risk Regulation: Cause or Consequence of the Acceptability of GM Food? , 2005, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[9]  J. Banja Obesity, responsibility, and empathy. , 2004, The Case manager.

[10]  Ian Janssen,et al.  The economic costs associated with physical inactivity and obesity in Canada: an update. , 2004, Canadian journal of applied physiology = Revue canadienne de physiologie appliquee.

[11]  J. Flier Obesity Wars Molecular Progress Confronts an Expanding Epidemic , 2004, Cell.

[12]  J. Haas,et al.  The association of race, socioeconomic status, and health insurance status with the prevalence of overweight among children and adolescents. , 2003, American journal of public health.

[13]  D. Schroeder,et al.  Justice Within Social Dilemmas , 2003, Personality and social psychology review : an official journal of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.

[14]  M. Roehling Weight Discrimination in the American Workplace: Ethical Issues and Analysis , 2002 .

[15]  E. Fehr,et al.  Fairness and Retaliation: The Economics of Reciprocity , 2000, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[16]  J. Spinelli,et al.  The cost of obesity in Canada. , 1999, CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne.

[17]  Stephen C. Graves,et al.  A Dynamic Model for Requirements Planning with Application to Supply Chain Optimization , 1998, Oper. Res..