37 found
Sort by:
  1. Alex John London, Responsiveness to Host Community Health Needs.
    There is near universal agreement within the scientific and ethics communities that a necessary condition for the moral permissibility of cross-national, collaborative research is that it be responsive to the health needs of the host community. It has proven difficult, however, to leverage or capitalize on this consensus in order to resolve lingering disputes about the ethics of international medical research. This is largely because different sides in these debates have sometimes provided different interpretations of what this requirement amounts (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Alex John London (forthcoming). Review: Henry S. [REVIEW] .
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Alex John London & Lori P. Knowles (forthcoming). Perspective: The Maltese Conjoined Twins: Two Views of Their Separation. Hastings Center Report.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Mark Sheehan, Claire Timlin, Ken Peach, Ariella Binik, Wilson Puthenparampil, Mark Lodge, Sean Kehoe, Michael Brada, Neil Burnet, Steve Clarke, Adrian Crellin, Michael Dunn, Piero Fossati, Steve Harris, Michael Hocken, Tony Hope, Jonathan Ives, Tadashi Kamada, Alex John London, Robert Miller, Michael Parker, Madelon Pijls-Johannesma, Julian Savulescu, Susan Short, Loane Skene, Hirohiko Tsujii, Jeffrey Tuan & Charles Weijer (forthcoming). Position Statement on Ethics, Equipoise and Research on Charged Particle Radiation Therapy. Journal of Medical Ethics:2012-101290.
    The use of charged-particle radiation therapy (CPRT) is an increasingly important development in the treatment of cancer. One of the most pressing controversies about the use of this technology is whether randomised controlled trials are required before this form of treatment can be considered to be the treatment of choice for a wide range of indications. Equipoise is the key ethical concept in determining which research studies are justified. However, there is a good deal of disagreement about how this concept (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Yael Schenker, Robert M. Arnold & Alex John London (2014). Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “The Ethics of Advertising for Health Care Services”. American Journal of Bioethics 14 (4):W3 - W4.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Yael Schenker, Robert M. Arnold & Alex John London (2014). The Ethics of Advertising for Health Care Services. American Journal of Bioethics 14 (3):34-43.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Alex John London (2013). Richardson , Henry S . Moral Entanglements: The Ancillary-Care Obligations of Medical Researchers . Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012. Pp. 253. $45.00 (Cloth). [REVIEW] Ethics 124 (1):206-209.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Alex John London (2012). A Non-Paternalistic Model of Research Ethics and Oversight: Assessing the Benefits of Prospective Review. Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 40 (4):930-944.
    This paper offers a non-paternalistic justification for prospective research review as providing a credible social assurance that the institutions of scientific advancement respect and affirm the moral equality of all community members and as creating a “market” in which stakeholders working to advance diverse ends also advance the common good.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Alex John London (2011). Equipoise, Research Stalemates, and the Limits of New Data. American Journal of Bioethics 11 (2):10 - 12.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Alex John London (2010). Justice in the Application of Science: Beyond Fair Benefits. American Journal of Bioethics 10 (6):54-56.
  11. Alex John London, Jonathan Kimmelman & Marina Elena Emborg, Beyond Access Vs. Protection in Trials of Innovative Therapies.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Alex John London & Kevin J. S. Zollman (2010). Research at the Auction Block: Problems for the Fair Benefits Approach to International Research. Hastings Center Report 40 (4):34-45.
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Jonathan Kimmelman, Alex John London, Bernard Ravina, Tim Ramsay, Mark Bernstein, Alan Fine, Frank W. Stahnisch & Marina Elena Emborg, Launching Invasive, First-in-Human Trials Against Parkinson's Disease: Ethical Considerations.
    The decision to initiate invasive, first-in-human trials involving Parkinson’s disease presents a vexing ethical challenge. Such studies present significant surgical risks, and high degrees of uncertainty about intervention risks and biological effects. We argue that maintaining a favorable riskbenefit balance in such circumstances requires a higher than usual degree of confidence that protocols will lead to significant direct and/or social benefits. One critical way of promoting such confidence is through the application of stringent evidentiary standards for preclinical studies. We close (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Alex John London (2009). Clinical Equipoise: Foundational Requirement or Fundamental Error. In Bonnie Steinbock (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Bioethics. Oup Oxford.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. Alex John London (2007). Two Dogmas of Research Ethics and the Integrative Approach to Human-Subjects Research. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 32 (2):99 – 116.
    This article argues that lingering uncertainty about the normative foundations of research ethics is perpetuated by two unfounded dogmas of research ethics. The first dogma is that clinical research, as a social activity, is an inherently utilitarian endeavor. The second dogma is that an acceptable framework for research ethics must impose constraints on this endeavor whose moral force is grounded in role-related obligations of either physicians or researchers. This article argues that these dogmas are common to traditional articulations (...)
    Direct download (12 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. Michael Benatar, Leslie Cannold, Dena Davis, Merle Spriggs, Julian Savulescu, Heather Draper, Neil Evans, Richard Hull, Stephen Wilkinson, David Wasserman, Donna Dickenson, Guy Widdershoven, Françoise Baylis, Stephen Coleman, Rosemarie Tong, Hilde Lindemann, David Neil & Alex John London (2006). Cutting to the Core: Exploring the Ethics of Contested Surgeries. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
    No categories
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. Ashok J. Bharucha, Alex John London, David Barnard, Howard Wactlar, Mary Amanda Dew & Charles F. Reynolds (2006). Ethical Considerations in the Conduct of Electronic Surveillance Research. Journal of Law, Medicine Ethics 34 (3):611-619.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  18. Emily L. Evans & Alex John London (2006). Equipoise and the Criteria for Reasonable Action. Journal of Law, Medicine Ethics 34 (2):441-450.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  19. Alex John London, Reasonable Risks In Clinical Research: A Critique and a Proposal for the Integrative Approach.
    Before participants can be enrolled in a clinical trial, an institutional review board (IRB) must determine that the risks that the research poses to participants are ‘reasonable.’ This paper examines the two dominant frameworks for assessing research risks and argues that each approach suffers from significant shortcomings. It then considers what issues must be addressed in order to construct a framework for risk assessment that (a) is grounded in a compelling normative foundation and (b) might provide more operationally precise guidance (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. Alex John London, Sham Surgery and Reasonable Risk.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  21. Alex John London (2006). The Moral Foundations of Equipoise and its Role in International Research. American Journal of Bioethics 6 (4):48 – 51.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  22. Alex John London (2006). What Is Social and Global Justice to Bioethics or Bioethics to Social and Global Justice? Hastings Center Report 36 (4):3-3.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  23. Alex John London (2005). Does Research Ethics Rest on a Mistake? The Common Good, Reasonable Risk and Social Justice. American Journal of Bioethics 5 (1):37 – 39.
  24. Alex John London (2005). Justice and the Human Development Approach to International Research. Hastings Center Report 35 (1):24-37.
    : The debate over when medical research may be performed in developing countries has steered clear of the broad issues of social justice in favor of what seem more tractable, practical issues. A better approach will reframe the question of justice in international research in a way that makes explicit the links between medical research, the social determinants of health, and global justice.
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  25. Alex John London (2005). Undue Inducements and Reasonable Risks: Will the Dismal Science Lead to Dismal Research Ethics? American Journal of Bioethics 5 (5):29 – 32.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  26. Alex John London (2003). Threats to the Common Good: Biochemical Weapons and Human Subjects Research. Hastings Center Report 33 (5):17-25.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  27. Alex John London & Joseph B. Kadane (2003). Sham Surgery and Genuine Standards of Care: Can the Two Be Reconciled? American Journal of Bioethics 3 (4):61-64.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  28. Alex John London (2002). Embryos, Stem Cells, and the "Strategic" Element of Public Moral Reasoning. American Journal of Bioethics 2 (1):56-57.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  29. Alex John London (2001). Equipose and International Human-Subjects Research. Bioethics 15 (4):312–332.
    This paper examines the role of equipoise in evaluating international research. It distinguishes two possible formulations of the equipoise requirement that license very different evaluations of international research proposals. The interpretation that adopts a narrow criterion of similarity between clinical contexts has played an important role in one recent controversy, but it suffers from a number of problems. An alternative interpretation that adopts a broader criterion of similarity does a better job of avoiding both exploitation of the brute fact of (...)
    Direct download (13 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  30. Alex John London (2001). Editor's Introduction: Theory and Engagement in Bioethics. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 22 (2):65-68.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  31. Alex John London (2001). Moral Knowledge and the Acquisition of Virtue in Aristotle's "Nicomachean" and "Eudemian Ethics". Review of Metaphysics 54 (3):553 - 583.
  32. Alex John London (2001). The Independence of Practical Ethics. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 22 (2):87-105.
    After criticizing three common conceptions of therelationship between practical ethics and ethical theory, analternative modeled on Aristotle's conception of the relationshipbetween rhetoric and philosophical ethics is explored. Thisaccount is unique in that it neither denigrates the project ofsearching for an adequate comprehensive ethical theory norsubordinates practical ethics to that project. Because the purpose of practical ethics, on this view, is tosecure the cooperation of other persons in a way that respectstheir status as free and equal, it seeks to influence thejudgments (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  33. Alex John London (2001). The Maltese Conjoined Twins. A Separate Peace. Hastings Center Report 31 (1):49.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  34. Alex John London, The Maltese Conjoined Twins: Two Views of Their Separation.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  35. Alex John London (2000). Amenable to Reason: Aristotle's Rhetoric and the Moral Psychology of Practical Ethics. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 10 (4):287-305.
    : An Aristotelian conception of practical ethics can be derived from the account of practical reasoning that Aristotle articulates in his Rhetoric and this has important implications for the way we understand the nature and limits of practical ethics. An important feature of this conception of practical ethics is its responsiveness to the complex ways in which agents form and maintain moral commitments, and this has important implications for the debate concerning methods of ethics in applied ethics. In particular, this (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  36. Alex John London (2000). The Ambiguity and the Exigency: Clarifying 'Standard of Care' Arguments in International Research. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 25 (4):379 – 397.
    This paper examines the concept of a 'standard of care' as it has been used in recent arguments over the ethics of international human-subjects research. It argues that this concept is ambiguous along two different axes, with the result that there are at least four possible standard of care arguments that have not always been clearly distinguished. As a result, it has been difficult to assess the implications of opposing standard of care arguments, to recognize important differences in their supporting (...)
    Direct download (11 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  37. Alex John London (1998). Virtue and Consequences. Social Theory and Practice 24 (1):1-23.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation