Ethics in scientific communication: study of a problem case

Journal of Medical Ethics 20 (4):207-211 (1994)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The hypothermia experiments performed on humans during the Second World War at the German concentration camp in Dachau have been regarded as crimes against humanity, disguised as medical research. For almost 50 years, scientists maintained that the study produced valuable, even if not totally reliable, information. In recent years, the results from the Dachau hypothermia project were glamorized with life-saving potential and a heated ethical dialogue was activated about the use of life-saving but tainted scientific information. In the wake of the debate, an in-depth examination of the scientific rigour of the project was performed and revealed that neither the science nor the scientists from Dachau could be trusted and that the data were worthless. The body of medical opinion accepted the unfavourable determination but a few scientists and ethicists have continued to endorse the validity, of at least parts, of the Dachau hypothermia data. The conduct of the scientific communications about the Dachau hypothermia experiments by the scientific and ethical communities invites serious consideration of a possible ethical misadventure. It appears that for almost 50 years, the results of the study had been endorsed without careful examination of the scientific base of the experiments and that secondary citation of relevant original material may have been commonly employed. These infractions contributed to a myth that good science was practised by the Nazis at Dachau. The more recent emphasis on the life-saving potential of the Dachau data, without citation of credible supporting evidence, has also been misleading. Similarly, acceptance of a determination by an in-depth examination that the 'whole' Dachau project if flawed with simultaneous endorsement of the validity of 'parts' of the results, poses an ethical problem. It is advisable that before seeking ethical consultation about the use of unethically obtained data, scientists should examine the quality of science behind the controversial information and ethicists should verify the integrity of the material prior to engaging in a dialogue

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,202

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Problems in the development of cognitive neuroscience: Effective communication between scientific domains.Edward Manier - 1986 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1986:183 - 197.
The legacy of the Hwang case: Research misconduct in biosciences.Péter Kakuk - 2009 - Science and Engineering Ethics 15 (4):545-562.
Radical Constructivism in Communication Science.A. Scholl - 2010 - Constructivist Foundations 6 (1):51-57.
Scientific misconduct and science ethics: A case study based approach.Luca Consoli - 2006 - Science and Engineering Ethics 12 (3):533-541.

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-09-13

Downloads
45 (#335,929)

6 months
2 (#1,136,865)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Should the Nazi Research Data Be Cited?Kristine Moe - 1984 - Hastings Center Report 14 (6):5-7.
Can scientists use information derived from concentration camps.Robert Pozos - forthcoming - Conference on the Meaning of the Holocaust for Bioethics, Minneapolis.

Add more references