Impact ethics


Pig-human transplants may be a misguided attempt to address the organ shortage

Françoise Baylis | May 10, 2022

At the end of 2021, 57-year old David Bennett Sr. was bedridden and on life-support with irreversible heart failure. He was not eligible for a human heart transplant or an implanted mechanical heart pump because of his underlying health condition and, allegedly, “a history of disregarding medical advice.”



Nubia – An Ebola survivor orphaned by vaccine policy

Françoise Baylis & Séverine Caluwaerts | November 25, 2016

Séverine Caluwaerts and Françoise Baylis lament the fact that in an epidemic as deadly as Ebola, pregnant women were denied access to potentially life-saving vaccination solely on the grounds of pregnancy.

Insurance companies shouldn’t access genetic test results

Françoise Baylis | September 28, 2016

Some people criticize Bill S-201 – most notably insurers. They worry about clients taking a genetic test, getting results that suggest an increased risk of developing a specific “genetic illness” and then “bulking up” on insurance.

Risky business: Genetic discrimination & insurance

Françoise Baylis | September 26, 2016

Françoise Baylis discusses the response of the Canadian insurance industry to Bill S-201, An Act to prohibit and prevent genetic discrimination. […] If Bill S-201 becomes law, there is no doubt that this legislation will have an impact on the sale of life and health insurance.

Human-nonhuman chimera research in Canada

Françoise Baylis | September 1, 2016

Françoise Baylis explains Canada’s regulatory framework for human-nonhuman chimera research and suggests that the proposed changes to the NIH guidelines to permit the funding of such research may have implications for Canadian research.

Pushing the 14-day limit on human embryo research

Françoise Baylis | May 5, 2016

Françoise Baylis calls for a better alignment of the science and ethics of human embryo research. […] A scientific breakthrough has prompted a call to revisit the 14-day limit on human embryo research. Is this new technology  enough to warrant a change in law or policy?  Do we have “new and compelling ethical or scientific justification” to change the 14-day rule?