Why Is It Ethical To Use Human Tissue Research?

The truth is the doctors that took Henrietta’s cells were doing it for a good cause. They didn’t do it to ruin her and her family’s life, they did it to help people and save lives. There were no laws prohibiting the taking of one’s cells, in fact in a later Supreme Court of California ruling, it was actually defended. When tissues are removed from your body, with or without consent, any claim to ownership

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.

The art of medicine and curing diseases was not always approached in a scientific way. In fact, many advances occurred between 1919 to 1939, after technological advances allowed scientists to apply the scientific method to medical research. At this time, the ethics of using patients as test subjects either for new medicines or as samples for further testing were not considered. An extreme example of this was the Nazi’s using concentration camp inmates – including children – to run painful and invasive experiments. More modern examples are not so easy to identify as unethical, however. While amputating a leg to develop methods to deal with fractures and war wounds is obviously unethical, harvesting cells to develop a vaccine is not so clear cut, as the disadvantage to the patient is hard to identify. Coming from the various Nazi testing and especially the Nuremberg testing and trials, another code of ethics was developed, called the Nuremberg Code.

This would create a big mess in science because patients would block the progress of science by holding huge amount of profits even when they don’t worth much. I don’t agree with the statement theft because when a individual comes to an hospital for any kind of check up and any type of blood testing they give right to a doctor to do whether or not to make any kind of research for their medical benefit and when they leave the hospital with their test results the one that is left like their blood samples etc. are garbage as it stated in the book, Court of California give a definite statement that says; “When tissues are removed from your body, with or without your consent, any claim you might owning them vanishes. When you leave a tissue in a doctor’s office or a lab, you abandon them as a waste, and anyone can take you garbage and sell it.”(Page 205) I do not think this is a situation that can be name as theft because selling someone’s garbage is not stealing because they are leaving them with their own

Research in laboratory involving human participants are important in discovering and understanding the mechanism of the disease and disorder in the human body. Any research involving human participant are designed to protect their rights and safety of participant. There are many rules and regulation that govern how researches involving human participants are conducted. The human tissue Act 2004 (HT Act) is one of such regulations which involves the use of human tissues for studies. The human tissue Act 2004 (HT Act) and the human tissue Authority (HTA) were established and designed to regulate the activities concerning the removal, storage, use and disposal of human tissue from both deceased and living human

Much medical advancement would not have been possible without cancer cells from Henrietta Lacks. While these HeLa cells are infamous in the medical community, the story behind them was barely known by any until Rebecca Skloot uncovered it.1 Information about Henrietta Lacks uncovers a history of consent not being asked for, and certainly not being given, but because of the cells, medical discoveries were made without her family’s knowledge.1 It brings to light the idea that while cells are a part of a person’s body, once they are out of the human body there is no more ownership. Without informed consent though, is it still owned by the person whose cells they are?

There were many researchers involved in learning about cells and their basic function. In order to do this, tissue samples were taken from patients to examine. However, in the past there weren’t many laws regarding informed consent and patient confidentiality. In my opinion, the Gold/Moore case is different than what Dr. Gey did with Henrietta Lack’s cells. Gold and Gey had very different incentives. Dr. Gey was a tissue researcher whose aim was to create an immortal line of human cells to be used for medical research. Gey had spent 30 years prior to the discovery of Henrietta’s immortal cells, working to grow malignant cells outside of the human body. His goal was to find the cause and cure of cancer.

John Moore lost the lawsuit against David Golde, according to the judge he had no right “to ownership interest in the patent - he was not one of the inventors. Nor, it concluded, could a patient exercise property rights over discarded body tissues.” (von der Ropp & Taubman, 2006). The loss of the lawsuit by Moore caused a lot of media attention and again a big ethical discussion in science. As previously said, this story also highlighted the importance of ethical and ownership laws in medical research.

The cells were kept alive long enough to allow the researchers to go in depth with studies and examinations. The ethical issue was, like stated before, that the Lacks family did not give physicians permission to take samples of her cells. But during that time permission was not required and that is why they were able to take the samples. In the court case of California v. Regents of UC in 1990 it was ruled that a person’s discarded tissue was not their property and could be used. The ethical concerns are still around today because recently researchers published their results and this affected the family. Things like lack of respect for the Lacks, just and even race and social class come into the conversation because of the use of her tissue without her consent.

Innovations and scientific advances in the 20th century brought about further knowledge of genes and genetics, and later of how diseases interact with human cells. This level of scientific progress was unprecedented, and the medical and biological ethics going along with the science needed time to catch up. From the 1950s with the collection of HeLa cells to the early 2000s with Dr. Catalona, there has been debate over who owns tissue samples taken from human beings. This paper presents an argument for a limited ownership of tissue samples.

“I think people are morally obligated to allow their bits and pieces to be used to advance knowledge to help others” (Korn). Different people have opposing opinions on the topic of whether or not patients or doctors own the body tissues after it’s been removed from the patient. Ownership is the act, state, or right of possessing something. Tissue ownership is different from ownership because once it leaves your body, you no longer own it. Contributing your tissues to the science world is superior because you can speed up medical advances, avoid litigation, and become a better individual by contributing to science and society.

For every rule made there's a reason. In 1951, Henrietta Lacks was diagnosed with cancer, there was a tumor found in her cervix that rocketed the exploration of cancer cells. The HeLa cell, standing for Henrietta Lacks, was taken as a sample from her tumor and studied closely by George Gey. The cells were put in a test tube and grew faster than any other cell studied. Henrietta soon died and her family was left out of the loop on the amazement of Henrietta's cell. Now people from all over are wondering if it is ethical to send Lacks's cells all over the world without her family knowing. Because her family and Henrietta gave consent to the scientists to take and use samples of her tumor I believe it is ethical for people to study these cells.

Rebecca talks about whether or not people should have the rights to their own tissues. She points out two issues, consent and money. In the past there was no informed consent, so the doctors and researchers felt free to use tissues in whatever way they wished, with little concern for patients' rights. Nowadays there is a different system, and it's required by the law to ask for a patient's informed consent.mThe money issue is a question of whether doctors should be required to tell patients if their cells or tissues are going to be used for commercial research, and what rights those donors should have. Later on, “scientists sequenced Henrietta Lacks's genome and made it public, without asking the family's permission” which was just another way in which the family was violated and looked over (Silver). Apparently Henrietta didn't get her rights, and neither did her children. Any way we look at it, if the family had received any benefits from the cells, it

Medical ethics and legal issues have been a key topic in medical field for many years now. It is important for medical professionals to understand the importance of the way we care for patients, it is therefore important to be knowledgeable and aware of the medical ethics and legal issues that govern good patient care. Health care professionals must make decisions based on ethical and legal issues to performance their regular duties. However, Medical ethics is not only about avoiding harm to patients. It is rather a norms, values and principles (Ethical theories 2015). Therefore norms, values and principles are intended to govern medical ethical conduct. Ethics is defined as “a standard of behaviour and a concept of right and wrong beyond what the legal consideration is in any given situation”. In another words medical ethics is a discipline that used to handle moral problems coming out the care of patients. Law is another important discipline that often comes together with medical ethics. Law defined as a “rule of conduct or action prescribed or formally recognized as binding or enforced by a controlling authority”. Government imply law to keep the society running smoothly and to control behaviour that could threaten public safety. Medical professionals have to often prioritise these terms before making any clinical decision. The following findings will constructively emphasise on medical ethics, its

Currently the stolen HeLa cells go for $10,000 a vial (Svalastog, 400). In the 1950s Henrietta Lacks had no idea her ovarian tumor was stolen from her and sold for research purposes. She died soon after they were taken due to the aggressiveness of the tumor growth, but her family has continued to live in poverty, even though millions of vials have been sold for research. Her cells have helped fuel over 60,000 scientific article, yet none of the people who has profited on them have been willing to give the family a penny (Svalastog, 400). John L Moore’s spleen was taken during his treatment’s for leukemia. Cells from his spleen, named Mo cells, have been sold for over 3 billion dollars since 2001. Moore fought the University of California all the way to the California Supreme Court, and he was still denied compensation for his spleen that he paid the doctors at the medical center there remove. These two cases are far from isolated, but showcase how big of a problem there is with patients’ rights to their tissue, even though it would be simple to address the issue of tissue rights simply by starting with a consent