I read Arthur Caplan’s criticism of the personalized gene tests that some companies insist we must buy to gain control over our future health. I could not help wondering if his criticism is applicable also to the idea that biobanks should inform research participants about incidental findings about their genes. Caplan rejects the crystal ball […]
Continue readingPage 46 of 51
I wrote a while ago about drug companies as whistle blowers. Evidently, the pharmaceutical industry wastes more and more resources unsuccessfully trying to replicate published research studies. The amount of irreproducible published research surprised me. If there is such a trend, questions accumulate. Are researchers becoming increasingly careless, or even fraudulent? Are researchers acting under too […]
Continue readingLast week I wrote about the significance of negative results in science. This week I saw one of the saddest documentaries I’ve ever seen, featuring the tragic context of an often cited negative result in science. The documentary, Project Nim (2011), was about the psychologist Herb Terrace’s attempt in the 1970:s to teach American sign […]
Continue readingSome years ago, John Ioannidis warned that most published research findings probably are false. More recently, the drug companies Bayer and Amgen reported that their attempts to replicate scientifically published studies that could be a basis for new drug development most often fail. Amgen, for example, failed to replicate 47 of 53 oncology and hematology […]
Continue readingLast week I participated in HandsOn: Biobanks, an interactive conference exploring the values of biobanking. The warm and collaborative atmosphere made the conference a both moving and encouraging experience. Here is how the conference made me think about the value of biobanks: New techniques of fundamental importance to humanity tend to appear in proportion to […]
Continue readingCollecting biological samples and health information from healthy donors in the construction of biobanks and research registers obviously requires the donors’ informed consent. But is a similar demand for consent reasonable when patients provide their doctor with samples for diagnosis, undergo medical examination and treatment, and answer the doctor’s questions? Or can patients be expected […]
Continue readingIn response to an informative article on personalized medicine and biobanking in Nature Biotechnology, a recent letter to the Editor defends broad consent for biobanking. The three letter writers emphasize the patient and donor perspective: “…patient donors actually express concern that study-specific consent can be burdensome and impede research.” Given these donors’ desire to give so-called broad […]
Continue readingWe regularly tell strangers about sensitive aspects of our lives. We do it every time we visit the doctor. We do it without hesitating, in spite of the fact that the information won’t stay with the doctor to whom we give it. The information is archived and will be read by health care staff in […]
Continue readingWhat fuels the tendency to view genetic information as exceptionally private and sensitive? Is information about an individual’s genetic disposition for eye color more sensitive than the fact that he has blue eyes? In Rethinking Informed Consent in Bioethics, Neil C. Manson and Onora O’Neill make heroic efforts against an avalanche of arguments for genetic […]
Continue readingIt is easy to be wise after the event. This easily accessible form of wisdom is also a painful accusation: you should have been wise before the event. If you are extremely sensitive to the pain of these attacks, you might want to become someone who always is “wise before the event.” If you let […]
Continue readingTHE ETHICS BLOG
A research blog from the Centre for Research Ethics & Bioethics (CRB)
We write for researchers, healthcare staff, officials, politicians, patient organisations and anyone interested in ethics.
We comment on the research ethics and bioethics debate and discuss our own research. We address issues from current debates in the research community and in the press.
MEET THE EDITOR
Pär Segerdahl is editor of the Ethics Blog and Associate Professor of Philosophy at the Centre for Research Ethics & Bioethics.