Guatemalan Pharmaceuticals

For over forty years a study conducted on 600 African American at the Tuskegee Institute in Macon County, Alabama, examined the outcome of syphilis in African Americans. These participants were uneducated and destitute, so when they were offered anything free, they did not see the harm. Of the group of 600 men, 399 who had syphilis were a part of the experimental group, and 201 were control subjects. (About Us, (n.d.)) What is the ethical dilemma in this study of syphilis? The researchers picked illiterate subjects who did not understand they had not agreed to informed consent. All subjects should be informed of the dangers of syphilis such as it can lead to a variety of painful, long-lasting and fatal symptoms, such as infection in the nerve-system, or heart difficulties. To examine the individual risk and lethal development of the disease, the researchers deprived

Have you ever wondered where a doctor’s method came from? Or so much to even, think who came up with the original idea? America has an interesting medical history, or as I like to call them experiments. Some of those experiments were a positive asset to the history, but others were horrifying. One of those horrifying events would be Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment. James H. Jones, the author of “Bad Blood: The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment”, covered a book on the historical event. The study was for how the African American male is affected by untreated syphilis. But through the evolvement of the experiment, it became about the neurological aspect. It also depicts the American Government for its untrustworthiness in the health care world.

Clearly, these researchers had their own agenda to acquire a medical breakthrough that would change the history of science and contribute to the greater good of society. However, their authority was used in an unwarranted manner to accomplish their goals, regardless of their respectable intentions in wanting to make medical progress. In reviewing these researchers and medical practitioners’ actions during the 1950’s which entails series of unethical behaviors and violation of human right, it develops an essential need to establish guidelines in the attempt to protect patient’s rights and privacy. Furthermore, due to the alternatives that arise throughout this case, there are many possible outcomes to be considered that could have a significant impact on stakeholders if these courses of action are fallowed. These solutions consequences may involve the tentative research, an advance way of life for the Lack’s family, political turmoil, economic health impact and a society whose cells may have similar experience.

Due to the lack of money but the high demand of need of specific regimens in developing countries, researchers from developed countries are allowed to conduct trials on those citizens. In this article, Baruch Brody argues against moral criticisms given towards clinical trials in developing countries. His three arguments are the subjects weren’t treated unjustly (following an appropriate standard of justice), the subjects weren’t coerced (in terms of any plausible interpretation of the word), and the subjects weren’t being exploited (if they themselves gain access to the treatment after the study).

Today there are many more laws and steps to take in order to conduct a study with human subjects and the Tuskegee Syphilis Study would never be approved in today's society due to the many violations to human rights that this study would incur. The study would still violate the Henderson Act as well as the Declaration of Helsinki and in addition would violate several other newly developed guidelines. The National Organization for Human Services has created a set of standards that human service workers should abide by. A human service worker has a responsibility to treat their clients with respect and dignity as well as looking out for their safety (NOHS, 2005). A human service worker has an obligation to avoid any type of treatment or experiment that would put the client in harm's way.

The issues that were involved in the violation of the ethical principles involving human subjects include racism, paternalism, informed consent, truth telling, scientism, and whistle blowing. There were other issues that were involved in this study: double standards, maleficence, and the use of deception in research among others. The issue of racism was seen clearly in this study. Four hundred black persons were infected and two hundred served as a control group. Caucasians were not enrolled in this study. This was a violation of justice because the subjects were not treated

The central ethical conflicts of the Clara’s case are several infringements committed regarding human rights in human experimentation. According to the American Psychological Association Code of Ethics [APA] (2010) experiments such as Clara would have violated several sections from standard 8: 8.01 (obtaining institutional approval), 8.02 (participants’ informed consent), 8.04 (client/patient, student, and subordinate respect to continue in research), 8.07 (deception in research), and 8.09 (humane care). Section 8.01 indicates that researchers must obtain approval prior

In todays society, the common consensus about human experimentation is that it is unethical, however, people in the past believed it was necessary to advance scientific discoveries. The Tuskegee syphilis study is a prime example of how scientists in the past disregarded the ethics of human experimentation to enhance scientific research. The study was an experiment where four- hundred to six-hundred uneducated African American men were tricked into being tested. Most of the patients were injected with the disease and left without treatment to discover its effects, while the others were safe being used as controls. This experiment lasted for Forty years and was probably the biggest example of unethical human experimentation in America. Fortunatley, the contrivertial actions taken in the experiment lead future generations to create the law of informed consent where the patient understands what will happen during their treatment. The inspiration for researching this topic was how in “The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks”, by Rebecca Skloot, Henrietta was used for a scientific study without her consent. In relation to Henrietta, the men in the syphilis study were not aware of what was happening to them and were experimented on without their consent. Overall, the human experimentation in the Tuskegee syphilis study was unethical in many ways.

There are a multitude of constituents that could be modified to make these unprincipled studies ethical for subjects. The Tuskegee syphilis study was an unscrupulous experiment that illustrated the significance of morality in human experimentations. A noteworthy alteration that would be made is guaranteeing that every participant in experiments are given a full assessment of the dangers that can arise from the experiment. Consent was an element that was fundamentally nonexistent in the Tuskegee syphilis experiment, resulting in the study being expressively immoral. In addition, a momentous ethical and legal issue involved in the Tuskegee study were the counterfeited information given to the subjects and the community. David Smolin, the author of the “Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment, Social Change, and the Future

In the lawsuit “Guatemalans vs Johns Hopkins University” over 800 Guatemalans were deliberately infected with sexually transmitted diseases and then treated with penicillin in an experiment to see if this antibiotic would work in treating these diseases. Researchers from John Hopkins School of Medicine infected kids in an orphanage, prisoners and mental health patients without their knowledge with syphilis and gonorrhea. These experiments happened from 1945 to 1656 but were not discovered until 2010. In the article it talks about how the experiment was kept a secret and did not publish any findings on whether the penicillin worked or not, probably because it was unsuccessful. It also talked about how the Guatemalans that were infected and then treat were not given follow up care nor information on what they were infected with.

In the lawsuit “Guatemalans vs Johns Hopkins University” over 800 Guatemalans were deliberately infected with sexually transmitted diseases and then treated with penicillin in an experiment to see if this antibiotic would work in treating these diseases. Researchers from John Hopkins School of Medicine infected kids in an orphanage, prisoners and mental health patients without their knowledge with syphilis and gonorrhea. These experiments happened from 1945 to 1656 but were not discovered until 2010. In the article it talked about how the experiment was kept a secret and did not publish any findings on whether the penicillin worked or not, probably because it was unsuccessful. It also talked about how the Guatemalans that were infected and then no follow up treatment was offered nor information on what diseases they were infected with.

The ethical implication of using prisoners as human test subjects according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services include 1) use of study subjects who were members of highly vulnerable populations, 2) research without valid informed consent, and 3) deception in conducting the experiments. It is said that the initial intent of the study was to look for ways to “prevent” the spread of STDs that included gonorrhea, chancroid, and syphilis. My biggest questions are: how/why do you find prevention in a population that would not already be at big risks for these diseases and why infect individuals if you are attempting to find prevention? Since these are sexually transmitted diseases, how could those conducting this experiment know

Medical experimentation without consent has been an issue of debate in the US over the past few years, namely on prisoners who have no way to defend themselves against the act. In 1948, Americans ran a syphilis drug trial on Guatemalan prisoners without their consent. This issue obviously poses major ethical dilemmas and even legal implications. It is my opinion that medical experimentation without consent is a morally atrocious act and should never be done.

The Nuremberg Doctors Trial of 1946 is the preeminent case recognizing the importance of medical ethics and human rights specifically about human research subjects. The defendants in the trials include Nazi leadership, physicians, and investigators prosecuted for conducting unethical and inhumane medical experiments on civilians and prisoners of war resulting in extreme pain, suffering, permanent injury and often death. The Nuremberg Code, borne of these trials, establishes ethical guidelines for human experimentation to ensure the rights of subjects in medical research. Herein, this writer will first identify and discuss ethical dilemmas presented in the Nuremberg case followed by three

Very relevant to this study is compensation/incentives. The participants were very poor and received the incentive of $25 to participate in the study. Burial insurance was provided to the participants, as well as free health care for the supposed illness of “bad blood.” Physical distress is also very relevant. The researchers provided toxic treatment to the participants. The researchers performed spinal taps that were very painful to endure. The lack of proper treatment of syphilis led to the advancement of the disease, which was the cause of death for some of the participants. Other sexual partners contracted syphilis and children were born with congenital syphilis, so they also incurred physical distress. A third relevant ethical dimension