Abstract:Recent findings in epigenetics have been attracting much attention from social scientists and bioethicists because they reveal the molecular mechanisms by which exposure to socioenvironmental factors, such as pollutants and social adversity, can influence the expression of genes throughout life. Most surprisingly, some epigenetic modifications may also be heritable via germ cells across generations. Epigenetics may be the missing molecular evidence of the importance of using preventive strategies at the policy level to reduce the incidence and prevalence of common diseases. But while this "policy translation" of epigenetics introduces new arguments in favor of public health strategies and policy-making, a more "clinical translation" of epigenetics is also emerging. It focuses on the biochemical mechanisms and epigenetic variants at the origin of disease, leading to novel biomedical means of assessing epigenetic susceptibility and reversing detrimental epigenetic variants. In this paper, we argue that the impetus to create new biomedical interventions to manipulate and reverse epigenetic variants is likely to garner more attention than effective social and public health interventions and therefore also to garner a greater share of limited public resources. This is likely to happen because of the current biopolitical context in which scientific findings are translated. This contemporary neoliberal "regime of truth," to use a term from Michel Foucault, greatly influences the ways in which knowledge is being interpreted and implemented. Building on sociologist Thomas Lemke's Foucauldian "analytics of biopolitics" and on literature from the field of science and technology studies, we present two sociological trends that may impede the policy translation of epigenetics: molecularization and biomedicalization. These trends, we argue, are likely to favor the clinical translation of epigenetics-in other words, the development of new clinical tools fostering what has been called "personalized" or "precision" medicine. In addition, we argue that an overemphasized clinical translation of epigenetics may further reinforce this biopolitical landscape through four processes closely related to neoliberal pathways of thinking: the internalization and isolation (aspects of liberal individualism) of socioenvironmental determinants of health and increased opportunities for commodification and technologicalization (aspects of economic liberalism) of health care interventions.

Change in the policy community of human genetics: a pragmatic approach to open governance

Enabling responsible public genomics

New genomic techniques, old divides: Stakeholder attitudes towards new biotechnology regulation in the EU and UK

Governance of Gene-edited Plants: Insights from the History of Biotechnology Oversight and Policy Process Theory

[Commercialization of genetic research and its impact on the communication of results]

Epigenetics in the Neoliberal "Regime of Truth": A Biopolitical Perspective on Knowledge Translation

Human heritable genome editing and its governance: views of scientists and governance professionals

Community governance and democracy

Integrating Public Participation, Transparency and Accountability Into Governance of Marketing Authorisation for Genome Editing Products

From Government to Governance:The BSE Crisis and the Shifting of Policy Paradigm of UK's Biotechnology

Governing gene editing in agriculture and food in the United States

The Challenge of CRISPR-Cas Toward Bioethics

The interplay of ethics and genetic technologies in balancing the social valuation of the human genome in UNESCO declarations

The public-private research ecosystem in the genome editing era

Framework for the Analysis of Nanotechnologies’ Impacts and Ethical Acceptability: Basis of an Interdisciplinary Approach to Assessing Novel Technologies

"Protection for the public, better use of resources and clearer lines": Interviews with genetic counselors and their colleagues on the need for regulation in Quebec

The ethics weathervane

The genetic conception of health: is it as radical as claimed?

Public involvement in the governance of population-level biomedical research: unresolved questions and future directions

To be or not IP? Exploring limits within patent law for the constitutionalization of intellectual property rights and the governance of synthetic biology in human health

The EU legislation on "GMOs" between nonsense and protectionism: An ongoing Schumpeterian chain of public choices