Research ethics and Indigenous Peoples: Repercussions of returning Yanomami blood samples.

This work presents the case of the Yanomami indigenous people from Brazil that were the object of US ethnography initiated in the 1960s. The research brought harmful repercussions to the life of the Indigenous people of Brazil for several decades, and it took more than 40 years until the beginning of a process of reparation involving the Brazilian government and American universities. Objective: to discuss the meaning of the return of Yanomami blood samples, as well as contributions from the epistemologies of traditional Indigenous knowledge to the debate about research ethics and the structuring of means for the social control of researchers and the protection of participants in scientific studies, having as an example the Yanomami indigenous people from Brazil, subjected to noxious ethnography in the 1960s and the 1970s. This work used data reports recorded in secondary sources. In this article we argue that Bioethics needs to further diversify its epistemological foundations and to consider epistemologies and cosmologies beyond the frontiers of Western science, as the case of the abusive research involving the Yanomami indigenous people in Brazil reveals. We argue that traditional knowledge, such as those of indigenous and quilombolas, with their epistemologies and cosmologies, are fundamental for the election of less colonized and more efficient principles of research ethics, regarding the protection of the participants' rights in scientific studies. Traditional indigenous populations can teach us a great deal about doing research.

Bioethical dimensions of cultural psychosomatics: the need for an ethical research approach.

Contemporary psychosomatics is a research-based technical discipline and its social power depends on how scientific knowledge is obtained and applied in practice, considering cultural contexts. This article presents the view that the dialogical principles on which bioethical discourse is based are more inclusive than professional ethics and philosophical reflection. The distinction is advanced between rule-guided behavior and norm-justifiable acts (substantiation and justification). The practical implications of good practices in the generation of valid, reliable, generalizable and applicable knowledge are emphasized. For practitioners and researchers, the need to reflect on the distinction between patient and research participant can avoid the therapeutic misunderstanding, a form of abuse of the doctor-patient relationship. In addition, in resource-poor settings, the dilemma presented by the know-do gap (inapplicability of research results due to financial or social constraints) is part of the ethics' realm of the profession. Future prospects include a wider use of research results in practice, but avoidance of the know-do gap (the disparity between what is known and what can be done, particularly in settings with limited resources) requires a synthetic and holistic approach to medical ethics, combining moral reflection, theoretical analysis and empirical data.