Assuntos
Participação da Comunidade , Experimentação Humana/ética , Experimentação Humana/legislação & jurisprudência , Má Conduta Científica/ética , Má Conduta Científica/legislação & jurisprudência , Participação da Comunidade/legislação & jurisprudência , Guatemala , História do Século XX , Experimentação Humana/história , Humanos , Efeitos Adversos de Longa Duração/etnologia , Má Conduta Científica/história , Sífilis/etnologia , Sífilis/história , Estados Unidos , United States Public Health Service/ética , United States Public Health Service/história , United States Public Health Service/legislação & jurisprudênciaRESUMO
The U.S. Public Health Service's sexually transmitted disease (STD) experiments in Guatemala are an important case study not only in human subjects research transgressions but also in the response to serious lapses in research ethics. This case study describes how individuals in the STD experiments were tested, exposed to STDs, and exploited as the source of biological specimens-all without informed consent and often with active deceit. It also explores and evaluates governmental and professional responses that followed the public revelation of these experiments, including by academic institutions, professional organizations, and the U.S. federal government, pushing us to reconsider both how we prevent such lapses in the future and how we respond when they are first revealed.
Assuntos
Ética em Pesquisa/história , Experimentação Humana não Terapêutica/ética , Experimentação Humana não Terapêutica/história , Sujeitos da Pesquisa , Infecções Sexualmente Transmissíveis/induzido quimicamente , Infecções Sexualmente Transmissíveis/história , United States Public Health Service/ética , Adulto , Criança , Coerção , Enganação , Feminino , Guatemala , História do Século XX , Humanos , Consentimento Livre e Esclarecido/ética , Masculino , Manejo de Espécimes/ética , Manejo de Espécimes/história , Estados Unidos , Populações Vulneráveis/etnologiaRESUMO
The Division of Investigative Oversight within the U.S. Office of Research Integrity (ORI) is responsible for conducting oversight review of institutional inquiries and investigations of possible research misconduct. It is also responsible for determining whether Public Health Service findings of research misconduct are warranted. Although ORI findings rely primarily on the scope and quality of the institution's analyses and determinations, ORI often has been able to strengthen the original findings by employing a variety of analytical methods, often computer based. Although ORI does not conduct inquiries or investigations, it has broad authority to provide assistance to institutions at all stages of their reviews of allegations. This assistance can range from providing advice on best practices, to legal assistance, to suggestions for how best to investigate specific allegations. When asked, ORI can also conduct certain forensic analyses, such as a statistical examination of questioned digits or a simple examination of a questioned figure in Photoshop. ORI will not provide opinions or render judgment on such analyses while the institution is still conducting its investigation. Such analyses can be done without knowing much else about the case.
Assuntos
Má Conduta Científica , United States Office of Research Integrity , Comissão de Ética , Má Conduta Científica/legislação & jurisprudência , Estados Unidos , United States Office of Research Integrity/legislação & jurisprudência , United States Public Health Service/ética , United States Public Health Service/legislação & jurisprudênciaRESUMO
The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment (TSE) has shaped African Americans' views of the American health care system, contributing to a reluctance to participate in biomedical research and a suspicion of the medical system. This essay examines public discourses surrounding President Clinton's attempt to restore African Americans' trust by apologizing for the TSE. Through a narrative reading, we illustrate the failure of this text as an attempt to reconcile the United States Public Health Service and the African American public. We conclude by noting the limitations of rhetoric when equal prominence is not given to policy proposals in national apologies.