How to embed ethics into laboratory research.

Health-related innovation in biotechnology requires anticipating potential bioethical implications. In this article, we present a strategy to embed ethics in a group of early-stage researchers performing research in gene therapy and regenerative medicine in the laboratory phase. We conducted a series of focus group meetings with early-stage researchers who work in biotechnology laboratories. The objective was to reflect on the bioethical challenges of their own work and to promote the integration of research ethics with laboratory practice. The activity was assessed with questionnaires completed by the researchers before and after the meetings, and the analyses of the focus groups' content. As a result of the focus group series, all participants changed their perspectives about ethical issues regarding their planned research, developed the ability to reflect and debate on research ethics and had increased awareness of ethical issues in their own research activities. Half of them made changes in their research work. The study provides a concrete strategy to embed ethics and to strengthen responsibility in laboratory research. It is a strategy that allows to perform ethics reflection "on site" and in "real time" and complements the classic strategy of ethics assessment of the research protocol before starting the research procedure.

"We Should Be at the Back of the Line": A Frame Analysis of Old Age Within the Distribution Order of the COVID-19 Vaccine.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: In the fall of 2020, it became clear that the initial doses of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine would be limited, and a priority order would be necessary. This article examines the perceptions of old age in the context of establishing a priority order for the COVID-19 vaccine from the perspective of online newspaper commenters. Two research questions are investigated: (a) How do commenters place older people in line for the COVID-19 vaccine? and (b) What frames and factors do commenters use as reasoning for their proposed position of older adults? RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This study involves a frame analysis of 440 online comments on an article published by The New York Times on December 1, 2020 about the U.S. recommendations for distributing the coronavirus vaccine. RESULTS: Older adults were referenced as belonging to one of the 3 groups: older long-term care residents, older workers, and older adults retired and/or isolating at home. Two frames emerged from the data as criteria for prioritization: social contribution and vulnerability. Older commenters themselves frequently stated that they should be deprioritized so that others can be inoculated earlier. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS: The findings may be interpreted as demonstrative of pervasive ageism throughout the pandemic; older commenters' sacrificial remarks may reflect generativity, internalized ageism, social pressure from online forums, or some combination thereof.