DoAssignment study guide

B1.1 · Analyse ethical issues in systems-biology technologies

Learn to analyse ethical issues in systems-biology technologies through clear examples and targeted practice.

Ontario Grade 10 Science

Biology: Tissues, Organs, and Systems

How to weigh benefits, risks, and responsibilities

A health team uses a computer to compare information about many parts of a person's body. The team hopes to identify a pattern linked to illness. This may help care, but it also raises questions: Who may see the information? Did the person agree to its use? Could the result be misunderstood? These are ethical questions. Ethics means thinking about what is fair, responsible, and respectful. In this lesson, you will practise analysing such questions without assuming that a technology is automatically good or bad.

What you will learn

Explain what a systems-biology technology does in simple terms.
Identify people or living things affected by a technology.
Analyse an ethical issue by considering possible benefits, harms, fairness, choice, and uncertainty.
Use evidence carefully and explain what further information is needed.

From Grade 9 science to systems biology

In Grade 9 science, you learned to describe living things using their parts and functions. A living system can include many connected parts. For example, the parts of a body can affect one another. A change in one part may have effects elsewhere.

Systems biology is an approach to studying how parts of a living system work together. A systems-biology technology is a tool or method used to collect, organize, or study information about those connected parts. For example, a computer program might compare many kinds of health information to look for a pattern. The program can help people study the system, but people still decide how to use its results.

An ethical issue arises when choices about a technology could affect people, other living things, or the environment. Analysis means more than naming a concern. It means examining who is affected, what benefits and harms are possible, what evidence supports those possibilities, and what remains uncertain.

A biological system has connected parts.
A technology can help collect or study information about a system.
Ethical analysis considers effects, evidence, and uncertainty.

A model for analysing an ethical issue

Begin with a specific technology and its intended use. Avoid judging a vague idea such as “new science.” For instance, ask about a computer tool that looks for patterns in health information, rather than about technology in general.

Next, identify who or what may be affected. This could include the person whose information is used, their family, health workers, a community, or other living things. Different groups may experience different benefits and risks.

Then examine benefits and harms. A possible benefit is not a guaranteed result, and a possible harm is not proof that harm will occur. Ask what evidence supports each claim. Consider whether the evidence comes from a suitable group and whether important information is missing.

Finally, consider fairness, choice, and uncertainty. Fairness asks whether benefits and risks are shared justly. Choice asks whether people understand and agree to the use of their information or living material. Uncertainty means that the effects are not fully known. A strong analysis can recognize uncertainty without pretending to know the outcome.

This model does not produce one answer for every situation. It helps you explain a careful judgement and the reasons for it.

Name the technology and its intended use.
Identify affected groups and consider benefits and harms.
Check evidence, fairness, choice, and uncertainty.
Support a judgement with reasons; do not treat a possibility as a proven fact.

Evidence, consent, and responsible decisions

Evidence is information that helps support or question a claim. In an ethical discussion, separate what is known from what is predicted. A claim that a tool may help identify a health pattern is different from evidence that it has helped every group equally. Ask who was included, what was measured, and what the information does not show.

Consent means a person's informed agreement to a particular use. Informed means the person has been given understandable information about what will happen and relevant risks or limits. Agreement to one use does not automatically mean agreement to every later use. An ethical decision should consider whether people can ask questions and make a real choice.

Privacy concerns how personal information is collected, stored, and shared. Information about a person's body may be sensitive. Ask who can access it, how it will be protected, and whether it could be used in a way the person did not expect. Do not assume that a promise of privacy removes every possible risk.

Responsible analysis also includes safety and limits. This lesson uses hypothetical situations for discussion; it does not ask you to collect health information or handle biological samples. In real settings, trained people follow appropriate rules and safeguards. A technology's possible benefit does not remove the need to consider possible harm.

Distinguish evidence from prediction.
Consent should be informed and connected to the proposed use.
Privacy and safety are part of ethical analysis.

Make a balanced judgement

A balanced judgement does not require giving benefits and harms equal weight. It means considering relevant points fairly and explaining why some matter more in a particular case. For example, a serious privacy risk may deserve strong attention even if a tool could be useful.

When information is incomplete, state what you cannot conclude. Then name the information that would help, such as clearer details about data access or evidence from people with different backgrounds. This keeps your analysis honest and useful.

A balanced judgement weighs the importance of the possible effects.
State what is unknown and what evidence could help.

Worked example

Health-pattern software and personal information

Hypothetical case: A clinic plans to use software that compares several kinds of health information to look for patterns that may help guide care. Patients are told that their information may be used, but the notice does not clearly say who can access it later. Analyse the ethical issue.

Identify the use
The technology compares health information to look for patterns that may guide care. The stated purpose is possible support for patients, not a guaranteed improvement.
Consider effects and choice
A possible benefit is that the pattern could help a care team. A concern is that patients do not clearly know who may see their information later. The notice may not give enough information for an informed choice.
State a careful judgement
The plan may be more responsible if patients receive clear information about access and later use, and can make an informed choice. More evidence about how the software works and who may access the information would help. The case does not prove that information will be misused, but the unclear notice is a real concern.

Answer: The possible care benefit should be weighed against privacy and informed-choice concerns. The unclear access information should be addressed before patients can make a fully informed decision.

Check: The analysis separates a possible benefit from a guaranteed result and does not claim that misuse has already occurred.

Worked example

A tool that may not work equally well for everyone

Hypothetical case: A health organization considers a pattern-finding tool. The information used to develop it came mostly from one group of people. The organization hopes to use it with a more varied community. Analyse the fairness concern.

Notice the evidence limit
The information came mostly from one group. That fact does not prove the tool will fail for other people, but it limits how confidently the organization can predict its performance for them.
Identify who may be affected
People in the wider community may receive different levels of benefit or may be affected by incorrect patterns. Fairness matters because the tool could influence decisions about their care.
Recommend a responsible next step
The organization should seek suitable evidence about how the tool works across the groups it plans to serve before relying on it. It should explain remaining limits and consider how decisions can be reviewed. This recommendation responds to uncertainty rather than assuming a particular outcome.

Answer: The main concern is whether the available evidence supports use with the wider community. The organization should not assume equal performance from information drawn mostly from one group.

Check: The conclusion identifies a limit in the evidence without claiming that the tool definitely harms or excludes anyone.

Worked example

Using biological information for a new purpose

Hypothetical case: People agree to provide health information for one stated purpose. Later, a research team wants to use some of it for a different study of how parts of the body are connected. Analyse whether the original agreement is enough.

Compare the purposes
The new study has a different purpose from the one people were told about. Agreement to the first use does not automatically show that people understand or accept the new use.
Consider benefits and concerns
The new study may help researchers learn about connections within a living system. Concerns include whether people have a meaningful choice and whether the information will be protected under the new use.
Explain what would support a decision
The team should provide clear information about the new purpose, access, and relevant risks, then consider whether people need to give new consent. The case does not specify all details, so it is not possible to decide every safeguard needed.

Answer: The original agreement may not be enough because the use has changed. Clear information and a meaningful choice should be considered before the new use proceeds.

Check: The judgement focuses on the difference between the agreed purpose and the proposed purpose.

Common mistakes and how to avoid them

Saying a technology is ethical because it might help someone.

Correction: A possible benefit matters, but also examine possible harms, fairness, choice, and uncertainty.

Treating a risk as proof that harm has happened.

Correction: Describe a risk as a possibility unless evidence shows that the harm occurred.

Assuming consent for one purpose covers every future use.

Correction: Check whether the new use was explained and whether people can make an informed choice.

Assuming the same evidence applies equally to every group.

Correction: Ask who was included in the evidence and whether it supports conclusions about the people affected.

Lesson summary

Systems biology studies how parts of living systems work together.
Ethical analysis asks who is affected and considers benefits, harms, fairness, consent, privacy, evidence, and uncertainty.
Support judgements with reasons. Do not present possibilities as proven results.
When evidence is incomplete, say what is unknown and what information could help.

Check your understanding

Question 1

A team says a health-information tool will benefit everyone, but its supporting information came mostly from one group. What is the strongest ethical question to ask?

Does the evidence support using the tool with the different groups who may be affected?
Can the team assume the tool works equally well because it uses a computer?
Should the team ignore the evidence because the tool might be useful?
Does the limited information prove that the tool harms every other group?

Show answer and explanation

Does the evidence support using the tool with the different groups who may be affected?

The evidence may not support a confident prediction for groups that were not well represented. This is a reason to ask for relevant evidence, not proof of either equal performance or harm.

Question 2

People agreed to one use of their health information. A researcher proposes a different use. Which statement is most careful?

The first agreement automatically covers every future study.
The new use should be explained so people can consider whether they agree to it.
The researcher must stop every study that uses health information.
Consent is not relevant if the new study could benefit people.

Show answer and explanation

The new use should be explained so people can consider whether they agree to it.

People need to understand the proposed use to make an informed choice. A possible benefit does not remove the need to consider consent.

Question 3

Which sentence best separates a possible benefit from a proven result?

The tool may help identify a pattern, but this case does not show that it will help every patient.
The tool will help every patient because it looks for patterns.
The tool is harmful because no technology is perfect.
The tool's possible benefit proves that privacy is not a concern.

Show answer and explanation

The tool may help identify a pattern, but this case does not show that it will help every patient.

The sentence describes a possible benefit and clearly states the limit of the available information.

Key terms

Systems biology: An approach to studying how parts of a living system work together.
Ethics: Thinking about what is fair, responsible, and respectful.
Evidence: Information used to support or question a claim.
Consent: A person's informed agreement to a particular use.
Privacy: Protection and careful handling of personal information.
Uncertainty: A limit in what is known or can be predicted.

Continue through SNC2D

View the complete SNC2D Ontario Grade 10 Science curriculum and lessons

About this lesson and its review

Published by DoAssignment. This reviewed lesson follows Ontario Grade 10 Science (SNC2D), expectation B1.1. It is a study resource, not an official curriculum publication.

Before publication, content is checked for structure, mathematical or chemical notation, calculations, course boundaries, and readability. Errors can still occur, so corrections are welcomed.

Official curriculum reference

Report a correction or ask a question