(Plagiarizing Zack Lynch’s entry - he also spoke at the event:) In June of 2006 I participated in a two day workshop on the future of human enhancement sponsored by the American Association for the Advancement of Science in DC. At long last, the report of the human enhancement workshop is now posted on the web (PDF version). It’s a very well documented 20 page piece that summarizes the group’s deliberations (about 40 experts). The first section is an overview of what constitutes human enhancement (HE). The second part examines the possible impact of HE on different sectors of society. The final section identifies potential next steps AAAS might take in the emerging debates on HE.
Link
The Case For and Against Enhancement - Hughes and Cohen (pgs. 15-18)....Hughes then presented a range of actions that are necessary to ensure the successful, healthy use of HE technology. He stressed the importance of promoting “techno-citizenship” and educating the global population on the science and technology behind enhancement. Technocitizenship is a term Hughes uses to refer to the right and responsibility of every person to be informed about important technological developments and contribute to the governance of an increasingly technology intensive society. He also advocated several policy measures, including creating universal health care, abolishing the distinction between therapy and enhancement, and enacting laws that establish an individual’s autonomy, reproduction, and cognitive ability as elements of one’s personal life. By providing universal healthcare, the government can help alleviate some of the gross inequalities in medical care and also increase access to HE for many who would otherwise be excluded.
Hughes also acknowledged concerns that unequal access to enhancement technology will exacerbate inequalities. Yet, he argued that the same concerns have historically applied to all new technologies, including penicillin and computers. Abolishing the distinction between therapy and enhancement also has important implications for healthcare and access to HE. Without such distinctions, medical insurance providers that wish to exclude certain expensive HE procedures and technologies from medical benefit coverage would be unable to do so. Similarly, laws explicitly protecting one’s right to make autonomous reproductive, cognitive, etc., enhancement decisions prevent third parties from unduly restricting someone’s access to HE technology. To address safety concerns, he recommended that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) be expanded in order to regulate the testing and use of enhancement technologies…
See also the AAAS statement: Human Enhancement and the Means of Achieving It PDF Version
IEET Blog