International Commission For The Protection Of Human Subjects Of Biomedical And Behavioral Research

In our ever-changing world the race to find the best technological advancements has never been higher. Progress within the medical field has changed drastically in the last 50 years. “Health is driven by the technologies that cure the unhealthy. These technologies need to advance along with an advancing society. In the last five decades new and improved, less expensive, medicine has been produced” (Leonard). Behind all this advanced medicine are the technologies, or creatures, that are used to test and improve the medicine. Animals are used to test the drugs and medicine that are in route to be produced for human use. “The term "Animal Testing" refers to procedures performed on living animals for purposes of research into basic biology and diseases, assessing the effectiveness of new medicinal products” (Humane Society). There are people who side with, and agree that animal testing improves the lives of humans, and there are individuals who believe the harm this research brings to animals is unreasonable and can be prevented.

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.

Through the ages, men have been able to find cures for catastrophic diseases through scientific research. Thanks to these advances, men have been able to prolong the life span of people, or provide better quality of life in cases in which a cure of various maladies has not been possible. To achieve such progresses, scientists have made use of prior knowledge, new theories, and technology obtaining numerous prodigious outcomes. Unfortunately, there have been many who have used questionable means for such ends. The German Max Clara is another case of a man with power and knowledge of science, who has misusing them. This paper aims to briefly identify principles and standards that would have been violated these days according to the existing APA Code of Ethics. Finally, ethical implications of making a moral judgment on past actions by researchers regarding human experimentation are discussed.

The author of this essay is a university student. In this particular essay, the author explains Mexican culture from a medical point of view. The topics that are covered in this essay are all related to health and medicine. The introduction of Mexico is discussed in detail followed by how Mexican’s understand death and birth. The author also mentions about how this particular group defines health and sickness. It is also discussed about what this cultural group does to maintain wellness. The author also throws light upon the causes that the Mexican’s think are responsible for illness. Another thing that is described in this essay is about how the healers of this society heal the people belonging to this society. Lastly, the author has explained about how an occupational therapist should deliver care to an individual belonging to Mexican culture.

However, the consent of subjects is enforced by the respect for the individuals used in research and the bioethicists that police peer-reviewed articles. A small hope has sprung forth from possible enforceable regulations that would require permission for the use of all human blood and tissue used in research. This has been proposed by the federal government. Sadly, neither the current standing nor the possible future of required consent is very well known in the general population. The lack of concern when it comes to these issues by the general population can be attributed to a simple problem, lack of knowledge.

Potential grave consequences that can result from irresponsible, or criminal, medical experiments. While we must be vigilant to protect innocent victims from such experimentation we cannot let that stifle our duty to continue making advances in healthcare and improving the lives of patients.

Their main claim conveyed is animals “will continue to be necessary as researchers seek to alleviate existing ailments and respond to the emergence of new disease” (Botting and Morrison 1). They state that animal research has aided in providing cures and medicines for several diseases and life threatening illnesses’. The authors acknowledge claims made for the opposing viewpoint, such as “the alleged differences between species…that supposedly render animal experiments redundant or misleading” (Botting and Morrison 17). They counterattack each of the claims with providing valid evidence to justify their reasoning. They begin the article by providing information on the issue and move toward the positive effects it has had over the years. They rely heavily on several studies and experimentations to defend their claim. Therefore the dominant appeal is logos because it refers to several studies and experiments that have contributed to the world of medicine. The authors cite a study that affirms that “Experiments using animals have played a crucial role in the development of modern medical treatments” (Botting and Morrison 1). Pathos was used in helping make the article more effective. It was able to prove that the results are not only for that one specific use, but the overall idea. The article was strengthened with its use of deductive reasoning since it develops a conclusion from the information and facts listed. It follows a classical model since it has an introduction, information, evidence, and a conclusion. This balanced approach of logos and pathos they maintain throughout provides the reader the correct impression that they are being unbiased in the analysis. Botting and Adrian’s purpose was to acknowledge all the contributions that animal testing has had on the medical field throughout the

The National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research was created to make guidelines to protect human subjects from harm in projects and experiments in 1979; this was the Belmont Report (Shutt, p. 67). Horrendous acts such as the Tuskegee Experiment (African American subjects who had or were given syphilis were unknowingly not cured and then monitored by researchers for the U.S. Public Health Services starting from the 1930’s until the early 1970’s) (Gamble, p. 1773) and the Milgram Experiment (people were told by a “person in a lab coat” (researcher) to test the memory of other “subjects” (portrayed by actors), and if an incorrect response were given then a shock was administered to the “subject” in which the level of shock would increase each time a wrong answer was given until a lethal shock was administered under orders from the “person in a lab coat”) (Shutt, p. 64 – 65). were allowed until the Belmont Report was created. The Belmont Report set three basic principles to safeguard subjects. These are: respect for persons (making sure all patients’ autonomies (of any capacity) are protected), benefice (minimal harm with maximum benefits), and justice (balancing harm and risk in all aspects of the experiment/project) (Shutt, p. 67).

Several historical events played a vital role in what has evolved to how we conduct research today and just as important, how the participants of such research are shielded and protected against the consequences that may be experienced as a result of these studies. We live in a world that is continuously changing and as we move forward, it is past experiences that influence how things are done in the present, and what may become in the future. The Institutional Review Board (IRB) exists to protect research subjects and ensure their rights are safeguarded and protected. This paper will discuss the role of the IRB and the protection of human subjects, the dilemma of societal advancements versus its cost on human subjects and the role of leadership in the IRB.

The research proposal will be sent to College of Medicine research ethical committee (COMREC) for approval before research is done. The researcher will obtain consent for approval from the Queen Elizabeth hospital director, Head of the department (obstetrics and gynaecology), Chief Nursing officer (obstetrics and gynaecology) and ward in charge (gynaecology ward) through a

The atrocities involved in unethical human research led to the National Commission to establish the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research resulting in development of ethical codes of conduct and principles to guide research. The foundation of research rest on the principles of: Respect of Person, Beneficence, and Justice. Certainly as unethical practice overlaps in its occurrence, so does application of the Belmont Principles, research relies on complete data, as a result the consideration for protection of human subjects must include all aspects of human

The Institute for Responsible Technology has many experts on technology and health topics. They reference well-known and respected doctors and organizations, which strengthens their reliability. They provide international examples, providing a broader view strengthening their arguments. This source also includes examples of past experiments strengthening their reasons for concern. A weakness

One of the main issues is whether or not it is ethically sound to use the results of the medical research that the Nazi’s conducted during World War II; there is much debate on this topic, with some saying that the research should not be used because most of the experiments were not well designed, which would result in data that is valueless. Others argue that although the data may have value, it is not ethical to use it because of the horrible ways in which the data was obtained. (Skolnik, 2016, p. 84). Another lesson that can be imparted from the occurrences of the Holocaust is the need for some type of regulation on a global scale of the research and medical practices taking place all over the world; although this is a very complicated and difficult practice, and although the vast majority of researchers would never commit such atrocities, if researchers such as Josef Mengele are left to carry out any experiments and procedures that they wish, the consequences could be terrible. Research cannot be carried out unchecked; there have to be ethical guidelines in place and these guidelines have to be enforced in some

Beauchamp, Tom L., and James F. Childress. Principles of Biomedical Ethics. 6th ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2008.

Throughout medical history, the collecting of human tissue samples has been utilized for many years and has lead to the acceleration of medical knowledge, however, this practice presents a debate about whether it is correct to use human tissue samples. Without legal documentation in place, scientists may exert control over the samples without alerting the patients. The collection and usage of human tissue samples without the patient’s consent has many issues surrounding the moral and ethical attributions of this practice which raises questions about the rights of the patient because without the knowledge of the crime, they would not have legal ownership or control over their tissue.