The Ethics of Clinical Research

“Ethics of Clinical Research” addressee’s the question is it acceptable to expose risks to small groups for the better of the whole group in clinical research. This article addresses more on human clinical research and not so much on animal clinical research. This article deals with how to conduct clinical research, who should conduct clinical research, under what circumstances is clinical research acceptable, and to what level of clinical research should be done on patients who cannot give consent.
This article answers the question, is it acceptable to expose small amount of humans to risks for the benefit of the whole society, by saying who should conduct clinical research and how to conduct clinical research. Who should conduct clinical research should be a skilled medical doctor, but not a regular doctor. The author says that a doctor has reasonability to his patients, and the doctor can’t assign drugs that might not help the patient out; the doctor has to assign medicine that will help the patient. When a patient is going through clinical research the medical doctor shouldn’t assign medicine to every individual being tested on, but should assign medicine by random. How to conduct clinical research should follow the Declaration of Helsinki which is strict rules that only country using USA money to do research have to follow by. If clinical research is being done by following the declaration of Helsinki and is being done by a professional medical doctor then the research is ethical.
To what level of risk for clinical research is ethical and how far should clinical research go for humans who can’t give consent to clinical research ethical? First, the level of risk for clinical research depended on the patient giving the doctor his consent. For example, if the doctor says this medicine might cure your condition or it might kill you; and if the patient give the doctor his consent then is ok. If the patient didn’t give the doctor his consent then it is not ethical. The level or risk for patients who can’t give consent, like children, the risks should be minimal as possible. The research shouldn’t kill the patient at all, but it shouldn’t affect the patient daily routine either. If the patient can give their consent the clinical research can go as far as the patient wants to go; but if the patient can’t give their consent the risks should be a minimal as possible.

recation paper
How “The Ethics of Clinical Research” goes with our class is when we talked about the “Ethical Assassin.” In the “Ethical Assassin” Mulford takes Lim to a building where they test on animals. What these tests are for is for none important thinks, for example the monkeys were being testing on how much video tape they can eat before half of the monkeys die. What this article mostly looked at was on human testing, and how not to just kill of humans for none sense tests. This article also brings up a Utilitarianism principal; that is it right that the suffering of a small group will bring huge amounts of benefits for a bigger group.
Some questions that I would ask for this article would be:
1. When is clinical research on animal ethical?
2. What if a patient consent is still not worth it to do the clinical test?
3. How do we really know that all this clinical research is going to be beneficial in the future?

Unless otherwise stated, the content of this page is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License