ANSWER ONE OF THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS: 1. In what ways might it be possible to redesign the Tuskegee...

Question

ANSWER ONE OF THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS: 1. In what ways might it be possible to redesign the Tuskegee Syphilis Study so that it was a more (or fully) ethical observational study of the syphilis disease? Explain your answer with reasons and argument. Your answer should include references to specific protocols and study design as well as the ethical requirements and principles that such protocols and design would be seeking to fulfill. 2. Explain the argument that the use of pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) is morally too continuous with principles and practices of the eugenics movements of the late 19th and 20th centuries. Do you agree with that view? Defend your answer fully. 3. On what ethical grounds might someone oppose predictive genetic susceptibility testing? Explain the argument fully and then evaluate it: Do you think that is a persuasive argument? If so, does the strength of that argument mean that such testing should never be offered? If not, why not? Defend your answer fully. 4. The executive director of the Garvan Institute, Professor John Mattick, stated in the media in 2014 that in the next five years genetic testing in Australia will move out of the research laboratory and into mainstream medicine. “Once in a generation something comes along that completely changes society,” he said. “This is the equivalent of the introduction of vaccination in the twentieth century.” Genetic tests will initially cost AUD $2000 but as demand rises, that cost is expected to lower to a few hundred dollars, making genetic testing considerably more accessible to Australians. On 27 July 2016, The Garvan Institute-owned gene information company Genome.One launched Australia’s first whole-genome sequencing clinical service. Question: Whether or not you think that such tests should be offered in a clinical setting, what ethical issues would arise from the availability of them on a non-clinical, direct-to-consumer, basis? Do you think direct-to-consumer whole genome sequencing should be available? If so, why and under what conditions? If not, why not? Defend your answer fully. 5. In your view, is there a significant moral difference between using ‘surplus’ embryos in research and using cloning techniques to create human embryos solely intended for research? Explain and defend your view, giving reasons and considering and responding to at least one objection to your position. 6. In your view, are any ethical problems raised by the regulated creation and use of inter-species cytoplasmic hybrids (‘cybrids’ or ‘chimera’) in stem cell research? Present your view and outline the reasons that support it, explaining and defending your reasons fully and responding to at least one objection to your position

Amit · Accepted Answer

CHOSEN TOPIC: TOPIC NUMBER 1
TUSKEGEE SYPHILIS STUDY
Table of Contents
Introduction	3
Probable Ways to Redesign the Tuskegee Syphilis Study	3
Ways to make it a More Ethical Observational Research of Syphilis Disease	5
Justifying the Opinion referring to Protocols, Research Design, Ethical Considerations and Principles fulfilled by the Study	7
Conclusion	8
References	9
Introduction
Syphilis is a sexually transmitted disease, the symptoms involve chronic pain, and deadly infections in several parts of the body including the nervous system and it can even cause cardiovascular problems. It may also lead to heart failure or cardiac arrest. Its full nature, cure or diagnosis –nothing was known to humanity before 1932. There were some previous experiments conducted by health care sectors and scientists but the results of the experiments were not satisfactory. The doctors had produced some treatments back in that time to control or cure it but the result was not as expected. Moreover, it was toxic and critically harmful for the patients.
Probable Ways to Redesign the Tuskegee Syphilis Study
In the year 1932, some scientists from the USA public healthcare sector decided to conduct another study based on experiments that would increase their understanding of dealing with the disease. It was done in Macon County and many African Americans were chosen for the experiments from Tuskegee, Alabama in the USA. Since there was no effective treatment back then, the main objective of the study was to observe the progression of the disease in humans and the aspects the disease leads to. Moreover, the scientists wanted to know if the patients can be left off without any treatment and whether that is the answer here (1). 
There were initially 600 African American people in the group whom the scientists had experimented on. Almost 400 men amongst this were people who already had syphilis but did not receive any treatment for it. The rest of the recruited humans were not affected by syphilis at all. It was a human based experiment. As the study moved further, more African American humans from Tuskegee were enrolled but the exact number is not certain as there was not one fully reliable source to verify it. However, it can be simply stated that the number too big to not notice and it was an inhuman study, to begin with. 
The US public healthcare sector and the government fully funded the study with full knowledge of the details of the Tuskegee syphilis study. The medical professionals and scientists who indulged in the study were also familiar with the experiment (2). Moreover, they were willingly doing it to those human beings. One of the major problems with this was that the scientists had falsely advertised for their study to gather human specimens. In their minds, they were doing the correct thing since many people have been infected and died because of the disease for centuries. The bacteria came to be known responsible for it in 1905. Nevertheless, the medical industry had failed to develop any long-term treatment plan or any cure for it. 
Therefore, it was not inhuman or immoral for them to gather human specimens, as they wanted to help humankind. For them, it was merely a small group of people being sacrificed to improve the lives of lots of other affected patients. They did not bother to think of the harm caused to the individuals and their families. The scientists had named the study “The Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis in the Negro Male” and it was misleading. The participants were told that they would receive free healthcare and free blood check-ups for diagnosing bad blood. Bad blood was the term to be used back then to indicate several critical ailments (3). 
The participants who were affected by syphilis beforehand were informed that they would receive free treatments from the government if they were willing to take part in it. The researchers stated that it was their last chance to be treated. However, instead, the scientists used them as mere lab specimens for a very dangerous spinal tap-diagnostic. Besides, the patient did not receive any treatment at all. Moreover, the partakers did not know and neither were they informed about the research method, its probable outcomes and the way they will be affected by it. Therefore,

ANSWER ONE OF THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS: 1. In what ways might it be possible to redesign the Tuskegee Syphilis Study so that it was a more (or fully) ethical observational study of the syphilis...

Solution

Answer To This Question Is Available To Download

Related Questions & Answers

Submit New Assignment