Change search
Link to record
Permanent link

Direct link
BETA
Nordström, Karin
Publications (10 of 13) Show all publications
Nordström, K. & Goossens, J. (2016). Personalized nutrition and social justice: Ethical considerations within four future scenarios applying the perspective of Nussbaum’s capabilities approach. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 29(1), 5-22
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Personalized nutrition and social justice: Ethical considerations within four future scenarios applying the perspective of Nussbaum’s capabilities approach
2016 (English)In: Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, ISSN 1187-7863, E-ISSN 1573-322X, Vol. 29, no 1, p. 5-22Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

The idea of personalized nutrition (PN) is to give tailored dietary advice based on personal health-related data, i.e. phenotoype, genotype, or lifestyle. PN may be seen as part of a general trend towards personalised health care and currently various types of business models are already offering such services in the market. This paper explores ethical issues of PN by examining how PN services within the contextual environment of four future scenarios about health and nutrition in Europe might affect aspects of social justice according to Martha Nussbaum’s capability approach. The scenarios have been created by a mixed group of stakeholders and experts in three consecutive workshops. This resulted in the definition of four future scenarios within a scenario space consisting of two variables: the ‘logic of health care systems’ and ‘conception of health’. Within each scenario, PN is likely to play a more or less important role in improving health by influencing food consumption patterns in society. Nussbaum’s capability approach implies a concept of social justice as a function of a minimum standard of human dignity. This denotes an account for equality in terms of a minimum of entitlements. However, also the ability of achieving individual objectives is essential for social justice. Personalisation advice in health and food consumption patterns, as aimed for by PN, is therefore acceptable provided a minimum of entitlements is guaranteed to all members of a society, and at the same time freedom concerning personal preferences is respected. Potential variation of how different people might benefit from PN should therefore be consistent with the minimum required as defined by the list of capabilities.

Keywords
Personalized nutrition, Social justice, Capabilities approach, Food consumption, Future Scenarios
National Category
Philosophy, Ethics and Religion
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hj:diva-28713 (URN)10.1007/s10806-015-9589-0 (DOI)000369013600002 ()2-s2.0-84949978593 (Scopus ID)HLKSkolnäraIS (Local ID)HLKSkolnäraIS (Archive number)HLKSkolnäraIS (OAI)
External cooperation:
Projects
Food4Me
Funder
EU, FP7, Seventh Framework Programme, Project No. 265494)
Available from: 2015-12-22 Created: 2015-12-22 Last updated: 2017-12-01Bibliographically approved
Ahlgren, J., Görman, U. & Nordström, K. (2015). Ethical considerations in relation to personalised nutrition: An overview of Work Package 5, with respect to ethics. Belgium: European Food Information Council
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Ethical considerations in relation to personalised nutrition: An overview of Work Package 5, with respect to ethics
2015 (English)Report (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

The objectives of Food4Me work package 5 included a baseline assessment of the ethical and legal aspects of personalised nutrition at the start of the project in 2011, as well as a final assessment at the end of the project (2015), taking into account results achieved in other work packages. The initial assessment made a number of ethical issues visible, most of them relating to the consumer of personalised nutrition service. The results depicted in this publication indicate that many of the questions raised in relation to these issues remain unsolved, and in some cases they seem to be neglected in relation to the services offered by internet companies.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Belgium: European Food Information Council, 2015. p. 7
National Category
Ethics Health Sciences Other Medical Sciences
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hj:diva-27254 (URN)
Funder
EU, FP7, Seventh Framework Programme, 265494
Available from: 2015-06-16 Created: 2015-06-16 Last updated: 2015-06-16
Nordström, K. (2014). Erziehung am Rande der Gesellschaft. Emilie Flygare-Carléns Die Rose von Tistelön (1ed.). In: Patrick Bühler, Thomas Bühler, Marianne Helfenberger, Fritz Osterwalder (Ed.), Erziehung in der europäischen Literatur des 19. Jahrhunderts: (pp. 21-38). Bern: Haupt Verlag
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Erziehung am Rande der Gesellschaft. Emilie Flygare-Carléns Die Rose von Tistelön
2014 (German)In: Erziehung in der europäischen Literatur des 19. Jahrhunderts / [ed] Patrick Bühler, Thomas Bühler, Marianne Helfenberger, Fritz Osterwalder, Bern: Haupt Verlag , 2014, 1, p. 21-38Chapter in book (Other academic)
Abstract [sv]

Antologin 'Erziehung in der europäischen Literatur des 19. Jahrhunderts' tar upp europeiska skönlitterära verk från 1800-talet och diskuterar deras förståelse av fostran. Kapitlet 'Erziehung am Rande der Gesellschaft. Emilie Flygare-Carléns Die Rose von Tistelön' presententerar ett svenskt verk. Handlingen utspelar sig bland Bohusläns fattiga befolkning och tematiserar de hårda livsvillkoren. I centrum står smugglardotters uppväxt och fostran. Denna syftar till att förmedla borgerliga värden till den kriminella familjens barn som lever avskilt på Tistelön. Antologibidraget diskuterar forstran utifrån ett periferi-centrum tema som kopplas till författarinnans biografi.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Bern: Haupt Verlag, 2014 Edition: 1
Series
Prisma - Beiträge zur Erziehungswissenschaft aus historischer, psychologischer und soziologischer Perspektive ; 21
Keywords
Flygare-Carlén, fostran, 1800-tals skönlitteratur
National Category
Educational Sciences
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hj:diva-25716 (URN)978-3-258-07824-3 (ISBN)
Available from: 2015-01-19 Created: 2015-01-19 Last updated: 2015-01-21Bibliographically approved
Nordström, K. (2014). Religionkunskap inom pluralism – Etiska reflektioner i ljuset av Martha Nussbaums capabilities approach. In: Hans Albin Larsson (Ed.), 14 röster kring samhällsstudier och didaktik: (pp. 79-94). Jönköping: Samhällsstudier & didaktik
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Religionkunskap inom pluralism – Etiska reflektioner i ljuset av Martha Nussbaums capabilities approach
2014 (Swedish)In: 14 röster kring samhällsstudier och didaktik / [ed] Hans Albin Larsson, Jönköping: Samhällsstudier & didaktik , 2014, p. 79-94Chapter in book (Other academic)
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Jönköping: Samhällsstudier & didaktik, 2014
National Category
Religious Studies Didactics
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hj:diva-24782 (URN)978-91-981530-0-2 (ISBN)
Available from: 2014-09-22 Created: 2014-09-22 Last updated: 2014-09-22Bibliographically approved
Ahlgren, J., Nordgren, A., Perrudin, M., Ronteltap, A., Savigny, J., van Trijp, H., . . . Görman, U. (2013). Consumers on the Internet: ethical and legal aspects of commercialization of personalized nutrition. Genes & Nutrition, 8(4), 349-355
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Consumers on the Internet: ethical and legal aspects of commercialization of personalized nutrition
Show others...
2013 (English)In: Genes & Nutrition, ISSN 1555-8932, E-ISSN 1865-3499, Vol. 8, no 4, p. 349-355Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Consumers often have a positive attitude to the option of receiving personalized nutrition advice based upon genetic testing, since the prospect of enhancing or maintaining one’s health can be perceived as empowering. Current direct-to-consumer services over the Internet, however, suffer from a questionable level of truthfulness and consumer protection, in addition to an imbalance between far-reaching promises and contrasting disclaimers. Psychological and behavioral studies indicate that consumer acceptance of a new technology is primarily explained by the end user’s rational and emotional interpretation as well as moral beliefs. Results from such studies indicate that personalized nutrition must create true value for the consumer. Also, the freedom to choose is crucial for consumer acceptance. From an ethical point of view, consumer protection is crucial, and caution must be exercised when putting nutrigenomic-based tests and advice services on the market. Current Internet offerings appear to reveal a need to further guaranty legal certainty by ensuring privacy, consumer protection and safety. Personalized nutrition services are on the borderline between nutrition and medicine. Current regulation of this area is incomplete and undergoing development. This situation entails the necessity for carefully assessing and developing existing rules that safeguard fundamental rights and data protection while taking into account the sensitivity of data, the risks posed by each step in their processing, and sufficient guarantees for consumers against potential misuse.

Keywords
Personalized nutrition Direct-to-consumer Nutrigenomic tests Attitudes Consumer acceptance Ethics Legal regulation
National Category
Ethics
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hj:diva-20869 (URN)10.1007/s12263-013-0331-0 (DOI)000320733200003 ()HLKSkolnäraIS (Local ID)HLKSkolnäraIS (Archive number)HLKSkolnäraIS (OAI)
Projects
Food4Me
Funder
EU, FP7, Seventh Framework Programme
Note

This study was conducted on behalf of the Food4Me project. Food4Me is the acronym of the EU FP7 project: “Personalised nutrition: an integrated analysis of opportunities and challenges” (Contract no. KBBE.2010.2.3-02, Project no. 265494). The Parties of the project are listed on the Web site of the project, http://www.food4me.org/. The project co-ordination was carried out at University College Dublin, Ireland, Institute of Food and Health; Project Coordinator: Professor Michael J Gibney, Project Manager: Dr. Marianne Walsh. For overall correspondence regarding the Food4Me project: Professor Michael J Gibney, UCD Institute of Food and Health, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland, Tel: +353-1-716-2824, Mail: mike.gibney@ucd.ie.

Available from: 2013-03-19 Created: 2013-03-19 Last updated: 2017-12-06Bibliographically approved
Görman, U., Mathers, J. C., Grimaldi, K. A., Ahlgren, J. & Nordström, K. (2013). Do we know enough? A scientific and ethical analysis of the basis for genetic-based personalized nutrition. Genes & Nutrition, 8(4), 373-381
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Do we know enough? A scientific and ethical analysis of the basis for genetic-based personalized nutrition
Show others...
2013 (English)In: Genes & Nutrition, ISSN 1555-8932, E-ISSN 1865-3499, Vol. 8, no 4, p. 373-381Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

This article discusses the prospects and limitations of the scientific basis for offering personalized nutrition advice based upon individual genetic information. Two divergent scientific positions are presented, with an ethical comment. The crucial question is whether the current knowledge base is sufficiently strong for taking an ethically responsible decision to offer personalized nutrition advice based upon gene–diet–health interaction. According to the first position, the evidence base for translating the outcomes of nutrigenomics research into personalized nutritional advice is as yet immature. There is also limited evidence that genotype-based dietary advice will motivate appropriate behavior changes. Filling the gaps in our knowledge will require larger and better randomized controlled trials. According to the second position, personalized nutrition must be evaluated in relation to generally accepted standard dietary advice—partly derived from epidemiological observations and usually not proven by clinical trials. With personalized nutrition, we cannot demand stronger evidence. In several specific cases of gene–diet interaction, it may be more beneficial for individuals with specific genotypes to follow personalized advice rather than general dietary recommendations. The ethical comment, finally, considers the ethical aspects of deciding how to proceed in the face of such uncertainty. Two approaches for an ethically responsible way forward are proposed. Arguing from a precautionary approach, it is suggested that personalized dietary advice should be offered only when there is strong scientific evidence for health effects, followed by stepwise evaluation of unforeseen behavioral and psychological effects. Arguing from theoretical and applied ethics as well as psychology, it is also suggested that personalized advice should avoid paternalism and instead focus on supporting the autonomous choice of each person.

Keywords
Ethics Personalized nutrition Nutrigenetics Evidence Paternalism Autonomy
National Category
Ethics
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hj:diva-20866 (URN)10.1007/s12263-013-0338-6 (DOI)000320733200006 ()HLKSkolnäraIS (Local ID)HLKSkolnäraIS (Archive number)HLKSkolnäraIS (OAI)
Funder
EU, FP7, Seventh Framework Programme, 265494
Note

The study was conducted on behalf of the Food4Me project. Food4Me is the acronym of the EU FP7 project: “Personalised nutrition: an integrated analysis of opportunities and challenges” (Contract No. KBBE.2010.2.3-02, Project No. 265494). The parties involved in the project are listed on the project’s Web site http://www.food4me.org/ Project coordination was carried out at Institute of Food and Health, University College Dublin, Ireland, ; Project Coordinator: Professor Michael J Gibney; Project Manager: Dr. Marianne Walsh. For overall correspondence regarding the Food4Me project: Professor Michael J Gibney, UCD Institute of Food and Health, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland, Tel: +353 (1) 716 2824, e-mail: mike.gibney@ucd.ie.

Available from: 2013-03-19 Created: 2013-03-19 Last updated: 2017-12-06Bibliographically approved
Nordström, K., Coff, C., Jönsson, H., Nordenfelt, L. & Görman, U. (2013). Food and health: individual, cultural, or scientific matters?. Genes & Nutrition, 8(4), 357-363
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Food and health: individual, cultural, or scientific matters?
Show others...
2013 (English)In: Genes & Nutrition, ISSN 1555-8932, E-ISSN 1865-3499, Vol. 8, no 4, p. 357-363Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

In personalized nutrition, food is a tool for good health, implying an instrumental relationship between food and health. Food receives a secondary value, while health would appear to be a descriptive biological concept. This article gives an introduction to cultural understandings of food and health. The wider definition of food and health is explored in relation to the commonly used scientific approach that tends to take a more reductionist approach to food and health. The different discourses on food and health are being discussed in relation to ethical aspects of personalized nutrition. The success of personalized nutrition is likely dependent upon the ability to integrate the scientific approach with everyday cultural, emotional, ethical, and sensual understandings of food. Health theories can be divided into two principal rival types—biostatistical and holistic. Biostatistical focuses on survival, while holistic focuses on ability as a precondition for health. Arguments in favor of a holistic and individualistic theory of health and illness are presented. This implies a focus on the ability of the individual to realize his or her “vital goals.” A holistic and individualistic health concept may have a reinforcing effect on the individualized approach in personalized nutrition. It allows focus on individual health premises and related dietary means of health promotion, as well as an individualized perspective on the objectives of health promotion. An individualistic notion of health also indicates that people with high levels of vital goals benefit more easily. To reach beyond these groups is likely difficult. This potential injustice should be balanced with global preventive medical programs.

Keywords
Personalized nutrition, Ethics, Food, Health
National Category
Ethics
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hj:diva-20863 (URN)10.1007/s12263-013-0336-8 (DOI)000320733200004 ()HLKövrigtIS (Local ID)HLKövrigtIS (Archive number)HLKövrigtIS (OAI)
Projects
Food4Me
Funder
EU, FP7, Seventh Framework Programme
Note

This study was conducted on behalf of the Food4Me project. Food4Me is the acronym of the EU FP7 project: “Personalised nutrition: an integrated analysis of opportunities and challenges” (Contract No. KBBE.2010.2.3-02, Project No. 265494). The parties involved in the project are listed on the project’s Web site http://www.food4me.org/. Project coordination was carried out at University College Dublin, Ireland, Institute of Food and Health; Project Coordinator: Professor Michael J Gibney, Project Manager: Dr. Marianne Walsh. For overall correspondence regarding the Food4Me project: Professor Michael J Gibney, UCD Institute of Food and Health, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland, Tel: +353 (1) 716 2824, e-mail: mike.gibney@ucd.ie.

Available from: 2013-03-19 Created: 2013-03-19 Last updated: 2017-12-06Bibliographically approved
Nordström, K. & Goossens, J. (2013). Personalized nutrition and social justice: Ethical considerations within four future scenarios. In: EurSafe 2013 11th Congress of the European Society for Agricultural and Food EthicsThe Ethics of Consumption: The Citizen, The Market, and The Law" in Uppsala, Sweden, September 11-14, 2013: . Paper presented at EurSafe 2013 11th Congress of the European Society for Agricultural and Food Ethics The Ethics of Consumption: The Citizen, The Market, and The Law" in Uppsala, Sweden, September 11-14, 2013.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Personalized nutrition and social justice: Ethical considerations within four future scenarios
2013 (English)In: EurSafe 2013 11th Congress of the European Society for Agricultural and Food EthicsThe Ethics of Consumption: The Citizen, The Market, and The Law" in Uppsala, Sweden, September 11-14, 2013, 2013Conference paper, Published paper (Refereed)
Keywords
personalized nutrition, food consumption patterns, social justice, capability approach
National Category
Philosophy, Ethics and Religion
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hj:diva-21138 (URN)
Conference
EurSafe 2013 11th Congress of the European Society for Agricultural and Food Ethics The Ethics of Consumption: The Citizen, The Market, and The Law" in Uppsala, Sweden, September 11-14, 2013
Note

The paper is accepted for publication in the conference procceedings volume.

Available from: 2013-05-17 Created: 2013-05-06 Last updated: 2014-03-13
Nordström, K., Juth, N., Kjellström, S., Meijboom, F. L. .. & Görman, U. (2013). Values at stake: autonomy, responsibility, and trustworthiness in relation to genetic testing and personalized nutrition advice. Genes & Nutrition, 8(4), 365-372
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Values at stake: autonomy, responsibility, and trustworthiness in relation to genetic testing and personalized nutrition advice
Show others...
2013 (English)In: Genes & Nutrition, ISSN 1555-8932, E-ISSN 1865-3499, Vol. 8, no 4, p. 365-372Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Personalized nutrition has the potential to enhance individual health control. It could be seen as a means to strengthen people’s autonomy as they learn more about their personal health risks, and receive dietary advice accordingly. We examine in what sense personalized nutrition strengthens or weakens individual autonomy. The impact of personalized nutrition on autonomy is analyzed in relation to responsibility and trustworthiness. On a societal level, individualization of health promotion may be accompanied by the attribution of extended individual responsibility for one’s health. This constitutes a dilemma of individualization, caused by a conflict between the right to individual freedom and societal interests. The extent to which personalized nutrition strengthens autonomy is consequently influenced by how responsibility for health is allocated to individuals. Ethically adequate allocation of responsibility should focus on prospective responsibility and be differentiated with regard to individual differences concerning the capacity of adults to take responsibility. The impact of personalized nutrition on autonomy also depends on its methodological design. Owing to the complexity of information received, personalized nutrition through genetic testing (PNTGT) is open to misinterpretation and may not facilitate informed choices and autonomy. As new technologies, personalized nutrition and PNTGT are subject to issues of trust. To strengthen autonomy, trust should be approached in terms of trustworthiness. Trustworthiness implies that an organization that develops or introduces personalized nutrition can show that it is competent to deal with both the technical and moral dimensions at stake and that its decisions are motivated by the interests and expectations of the truster.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Springer, 2013
Keywords
Personalized nutrition, Ethics, Autonomy, Responsibility, Trustworthiness
National Category
Ethics
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hj:diva-20857 (URN)10.1007/s12263-013-0337-7 (DOI)000320733200005 ()23504640 (PubMedID)2-s2.0-84879686320 (Scopus ID)HHJADULTIS, HHJÅldrandeIS, HLKövrigtIS (Local ID)HHJADULTIS, HHJÅldrandeIS, HLKövrigtIS (Archive number)HHJADULTIS, HHJÅldrandeIS, HLKövrigtIS (OAI)
Projects
Food4Me
Funder
EU, FP7, Seventh Framework Programme
Note

This study was conducted on behalf of the Food4Me project.Food4Me is the acronym of the EU FP7 project: “Personalised nutrition: an integrated analysis of opportunities and challenges” (Contract no. KBBE.2010.2.3-02, Project no. 265494). The parties involved in the project are listed on the project’s web site http://www.food4me.org/. Project coordination was carried out at University College Dublin, Ireland, Institute of Food and Health; Project Coordinator: Professor Michael J. Gibney, Project Manager: Dr. Marianne Walsh. For overall correspondence regarding the Food4Me project: Professor Michael J Gibney, UCD Institute of Food and Health, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland, Tel: +353 (1) 716 2824, e-mail: mike.gibney@ucd.i.e.

Available from: 2013-03-19 Created: 2013-03-19 Last updated: 2018-03-16Bibliographically approved
Nordström, K. (2012). Can We Educate for Freedom? Ethical Perspectives on the Pedagogic Paradox (1ed.). In: Parker, Stephen; Freathy, Rob; Francis, Leslie J. (Ed.), Religious Education and Freedom of Religion and Belief: (pp. 131-150). Bern: Peter Lang Publishing Group
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Can We Educate for Freedom? Ethical Perspectives on the Pedagogic Paradox
2012 (English)In: Religious Education and Freedom of Religion and Belief / [ed] Parker, Stephen; Freathy, Rob; Francis, Leslie J., Bern: Peter Lang Publishing Group, 2012, 1, p. 131-150Chapter in book (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

Within a liberal and democratic setting, education normally consists of a process of promoting increased self-determination or autonomy. By facilitating and encouraging self-determination, we are thereby deemed to be educating for freedom. Yet, paradoxically, to educate means also to restrict freedom. Education may be viewed as a series of planned inter­ventions into someone’s free behaviour, norms and habits according to certain ultimate intentions and ideals. The legitimacy of such freedom-restricting educational interventions is deemed morally justified as long as a balance is maintained toward the ends of autonomy and freedom. This chapter examines the relationship between means and ends in educating for freedom. Here, autonomy is viewed, not as opposed to heteronomy, rather as in relationship to dependencies of various kinds. It is argued that education for freedom is more plausible if understood as education within autonomy, instead of simply education toward autonomy. These theoretical arguments are illustrated by a discussion of the common didactic practice in Swedish schools of contract-signing in connection with individual study plans. The question is asked in what sense contract-signing may be a legitimate didactic means within a context of education for freedom.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Bern: Peter Lang Publishing Group, 2012 Edition: 1
Series
Religion, Education and Values, ISSN 2235-4638 ; 2
Keywords
pedagogic paradox, ethics, autonomy, freedom
National Category
Educational Sciences
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hj:diva-19405 (URN)978-3-0343-0754-3 (ISBN)
Available from: 2012-09-12 Created: 2012-09-12 Last updated: 2016-02-02Bibliographically approved
Organisations

Search in DiVA

Show all publications