David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Science and Engineering Ethics 16 (1):43-58 (2010)
Humanity entered the twenty-first century with revolutionary achievements in biomedical research. At the same time multiple “dual-use” results have been published. The battle against infectious diseases is meeting new challenges, with newly emerging and re-emerging infections. Both natural disaster epidemics, such as SARS, avian influenza, haemorrhagic fevers, XDR and MDR tuberculosis and many others, and the possibility of intentional mis-use, such as letters containing anthrax spores in USA, 2001, have raised awareness of the real threats. Many great men, including Goethe, Spinoza, J.B. Shaw, Fr. Engels, J.F. Kennedy and others, have recognized that liberty is also a responsibility. That is why the liberty to decide now represents an acknowledged necessity: biomedical research should be supported, conducted and published with appropriate measures to prevent potential “dual use”. Biomedical scientists should work according to the ethical principles of their Code of Conduct, an analogue of Hippocrates Oath of doctors; and they should inform government, society and their juniors about the problem. National science consulting boards of experts should be created to prepare guidelines and control the problem at state level. An international board should develop minimum standards to be applicable by each country. Bio-preparedness is considered another key-measure.
|Keywords||Dual-use biomedical research Liberty Epidemics Emerging infections Bioterrorism Biopreparedness Code of conduct Minimum Standards|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Sara Svensson & Sven Ove Hansson (2007). Protecting People in Research: A Comparison Between Biomedical and Traffic Research. [REVIEW] Science and Engineering Ethics 13 (1):99-115.
Bette Jacobs, Jason Roffenbender, Jeff Collmann, Kate Cherry, LeManuel Lee Bitsói, Kim Bassett & Charles H. Evans (2010). Bridging the Divide Between Genomic Science and Indigenous Peoples. Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 38 (3):684-696.
Czesław Radzikowski (2006). Protection of Animal Research Subjects. Science and Engineering Ethics 12 (1):103-110.
M. Quigley (2007). Non-Human Primates: The Appropriate Subjects of Biomedical Research? Journal of Medical Ethics 33 (11):655-658.
Dannie Di Tillio-Gonzalez Ruth L. Fischbach (2008). Harmonizing Regulations for Biomedical Research: A Critical Analysis of the Us and Venezuelan Systems. Developing World Bioethics 8 (3):167-177.
Annette Rid & David Wendler (2011). A Framework for Risk-Benefit Evaluations in Biomedical Research. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 21 (2):141-179.
Malhar N. Kumar (2008). A Review of the Types of Scientific Misconduct in Biomedical Research. [REVIEW] Journal of Academic Ethics 6 (3):211-228.
Louise Bezuidenhout (2013). Data Sharing and Dual-Use Issues. Science and Engineering Ethics 19 (1):83-92.
Christopher Tollefsen (2008). Biomedical Research and Beyond: Expanding the Ethics of Inquiry. Routledge.
Marek Czarkowski (2010). The Dilemma of Dual Use Biological Research: Polish Perspective. Science and Engineering Ethics 16 (1):99-110.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads4 ( #238,898 of 1,096,498 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #238,630 of 1,096,498 )
How can I increase my downloads?