166 found
Sort by:
See also:
Profile: David Resnik (National Institutes of Health, North Carolina State University, National Institutes of Health)
  1. David B. Resnik (forthcoming). Food and Beverage Policies and Public Health Ethics. Health Care Analysis:1-12.
    Government food and beverage policies can play an important role in promoting public health. Few people would question this assumption. Difficult questions can arise, however, when policymakers, public health officials, citizens, and businesses deliberate about food and beverage policies, because competing values may be at stake, such as public health, individual autonomy, personal responsibility, economic prosperity, and fairness. An ethically justified policy strikes a reasonable among competing values by meeting the following criteria: (1) the policy serves important social goal(s); (2) (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. David B. Resnik (forthcoming). H5N1 Avian Flu ESEARCH. Hastings Center Report.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. David B. Resnik & Efthimios Parasidis (forthcoming). Waiving Legal Rights in Research. Journal of Medical Ethics:2013-101547.
    The US federal research regulations prohibit informed consent, whether written or oral, from including provisions in which human subjects waive or appear to waive legal rights. We argue that policies that prevent human subjects from waiving legal rights in research can be ethically justified under the rationale of group, soft paternalism. These policies protect competent adults from making adverse decisions about health and legal matters that they may not understand fully. However, this rationale is less defensible if there is a (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. David B. Resnik, Susan P. Resnik, Robert Arnold, Julia Nissen & Bridget Haupt (forthcoming). Case Studies: What's A Pharmacist to Do? Hastings Center Report.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. David Resnik, Marsha Rehm & Ben A. Rich (forthcoming). Case Study: Pain and Sickle Cell Anemia. Hastings Center Report.
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. David B. Resnik (2014). Is Weapons Research Immoral? Metascience 23 (1):105-107.
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. David B. Resnik (2014). Making Sense of the Undue Burden Interpretation of Minimal Risk. American Journal of Bioethics 14 (9):1-2.
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. David B. Resnik (2014). Paternalistic Food and Beverage Policies: A Response to Conly. Public Health Ethics 7 (2):170-177.
    Sarah Conly defends paternalistic public health policies, such as New York City’s soft drink ban, on the grounds that they promote values that people accept but have difficulty realizing, owing to their cognitive biases. In this commentary, I criticize Conly’s defense of the soft drink ban and offer my own view of the justification for paternalistic food and beverage policies. I propose that paternalistic government restrictions on food and beverage choices should address a significant health problem pertaining to a specific (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. David B. Resnik & Kevin C. Elliott (2014). Bisphenol A and Risk Management Ethics. Bioethics 28 (9).
    It is widely recognized that endocrine disrupting compounds, such as Bisphenol A, pose challenges for traditional paradigms in toxicology, insofar as these substances appear to have a wider range of low-dose effects than previously recognized. These compounds also pose challenges for ethics and policymaking. When a chemical does not have significant low-dose effects, regulators can allow it to be introduced into commerce or the environment, provided that procedures and rules are in place to keep exposures below an acceptable level. This (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Zubin Master & David B. Resnik (2013). Hype and Public Trust in Science. Science and Engineering Ethics 19 (2):321-335.
    Social scientists have begun elucidating the variables that influence public trust in science, yet little is known about hype in biotechnology and its effects on public trust. Many scholars claim that hyping biotechnology results in a loss of public trust, and possibly public enthusiasm or support for science, because public expectations of the biotechnological promises will be unmet. We argue for the need for empirical research that examines the relationships between hype, public trust, and public enthusiasm/support. We discuss the complexities (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Zubin Master & David B. Resnik (2013). Incorporating Exclusion Clauses Into Informed Consent for Biobanking. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 22 (2):203-212.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Zubin Master & David B. Resnik (2013). Promoting Public Trust: ESCROs Won't Fix the Problem of Stem Cell Tourism. American Journal of Bioethics 13 (1):53-55.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. D. B. Resnik & G. E. Dinse (2013). Scientific Retractions and Corrections Related to Misconduct Findings. Journal of Medical Ethics 39 (1):46-50.
    We examined all 208 closed cases involving official findings of research misconduct published by the US Office of Research Integrity from 1992 to 2011 to determine how often scientists mention in a retraction or correction notice that there was an ethical problem with an associated article. 75 of these cases cited at least one published article affected by misconduct for a total of 174 articles. For 127 of these 174, we found both the article and a retraction or correction statement. (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. David B. Resnik (2013). . Philosophical Explorations 7 (1).
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. David B. Resnik (2013). Data Fabrication and Falsification and Empiricist Philosophy of Science. Science and Engineering Ethics 20 (2):1-9.
    Scientists have rules pertaining to data fabrication and falsification that are enforced with significant punishments, such as loss of funding, termination of employment, or imprisonment. These rules pertain to data that describe observable and unobservable entities. In this commentary I argue that scientists would not adopt rules that impose harsh penalties on researchers for data fabrication or falsification unless they believed that an aim of scientific research is to develop true theories and hypotheses about entities that exist, including unobservable ones. (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. David B. Resnik (2013). H5N1 Avian Flu Research and the Ethics of Knowledge. Hastings Center Report 43 (2):22-33.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. David B. Resnik (2013). Review of Rethinking the Ethics of Clinical Research. [REVIEW] Studies in Ethics, Law, and Technology 7 (1).
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  18. David B. Resnik (2013). The Price of Precaution and the Ethics of Risk. Studies in Ethics, Law, and Technology 7 (1).
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  19. David B. Resnik (2013). What Are Reasonably Foreseeable Risks? American Journal of Bioethics 13 (12):29-30.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. D. B. Resnik & E. Ness (2012). Participants' Responsibilities in Clinical Research. Journal of Medical Ethics 38 (12):746-750.
    Discussions on the ethics and regulation of clinical research have a great deal to say about the responsibilities of investigators, sponsors, research institutions and institutional review boards, but very little about the responsibilities of research participants. In this article, we discuss the responsibilities of participants in clinical research. We argue that competent adult participants are responsible for complying with study requirements and fulfilling other obligations they undertake when they make an informed choice to enrol in a study. These responsibilities are (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  21. David B. Resnik (2012). Ethical Issues in Field Trials of Genetically Modified Disease-Resistant Mosquitoes. Developing World Bioethics 12 (3):37-46.
    Mosquito-borne diseases take a tremendous toll on human populations, especially in developing nations. In the last decade, scientists have developed mosquitoes that have been genetically modified to prevent transmission of mosquito-borne diseases, and field trials have been conducted. Some mosquitoes have been rendered infertile, some have been equipped with a vaccine they transmit to humans, and some have been designed to resist diseases. This article focuses on ethical issues raised by field trials of disease-resistant, genetically modified mosquitoes. Some of these (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  22. David B. Resnik (2012). J. Rasko, G. O'Sullivan, and R. Ankeny, Eds. The Ethics of Inheritable Genetic Modification. [REVIEW] Journal of Value Inquiry 46 (3):383-385.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  23. David B. Resnik (2012). Limits on Risks for Healthy Volunteers in Biomedical Research. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 33 (2):137-149.
    Healthy volunteers in biomedical research often face significant risks in studies that offer them no medical benefits. The U.S. federal research regulations and laws adopted by other countries place no limits on the risks that these participants face. In this essay, I argue that there should be some limits on the risks for biomedical research involving healthy volunteers. Limits on risk are necessary to protect human participants, institutions, and the scientific community from harm. With the exception of self-experimentation, limits on (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  24. David B. Resnik (2012). Paternalism and Utilitarianism in Research with Human Participants. Health Care Analysis:1-13.
    In this article I defend a rule utilitarian approach to paternalistic policies in research with human participants. Some rules that restrict individual autonomy can be justified on the grounds that they help to maximize the overall balance of benefits over risks in research. The consequences that should be considered when formulating policy include not only likely impacts on research participants, but also impacts on investigators, institutions, sponsors, and the scientific community. The public reaction to adverse events in research (such as (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  25. David B. Resnik (2012). Responsible Conduct in Nanomedicine Research: Environmental Concerns Beyond the Common Rule. Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 40 (4):848-855.
    Nanomedicine research raises ethical concerns beyond those covered by the Common Rule. Investigators and research institutions should comply with environmental and occupational health laws protect research staff and the environment. Though the IRB should concentrate on risks to human research participants, it should also consider risks to identifiable third parties. Investigators should also address risks to identifiable third parties. Professional and governmental organizations should deal with the long-term social, ethical, and environmental consequences of nanomedicine.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  26. David B. Resnik (2012). Review of Is a Little Pollution Good for You? Incorporating Societal Values in Environmental Health Research. [REVIEW] Studies in Ethics, Law, and Technology 5 (1).
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  27. David B. Resnik, Gwen Babson & Gregg E. Dinse (2012). Minor Changes to Previously Approved Research: A Study of IRB Policies. Irb 34 (4):9.
    No categories
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  28. Daniel Patrone & David Resnik (2011). Pandemic Ventilator Rationing and Appeals Processes. Health Care Analysis 19 (2):165-179.
    In a severe influenza pandemic, hospitals will likely experience serious and widespread shortages of patient pulmonary ventilators and of staff qualified to operate them. Deciding who will receive access to mechanical ventilation will often determine who lives and who dies. This prospect raises an important question whether pandemic preparedness plans should include some process by which individuals affected by ventilator rationing would have the opportunity to appeal adverse decisions. However, the issue of appeals processes to ventilator rationing decisions has been (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  29. D. B. Resnik & Z. Master (2011). Authorship Policies of Bioethics Journals. Journal of Medical Ethics 37 (7):424-428.
    Inappropriate authorship is a common problem in biomedical research and may be becoming one in bioethics, due to the increase in multiple authorship. This paper investigates the authorship policies of bioethics journals to determine whether they provide adequate guidance for researchers who submit articles for publication, which can help deter inappropriate authorship. It was found that 63.3% of bioethics journals provide no guidance on authorship; 36.7% provide guidance on which contributions merit authorship, 23.3% provide guidance on which contributions do not (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  30. D. B. Resnik & Z. Master (2011). Authors' Response. Journal of Medical Ethics 37 (7):449-449.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  31. David Resnik (2011). Scientific Research and the Public Trust. Science and Engineering Ethics 17 (3):399-409.
    This essay analyzes the concept of public trust in science and offers some guidance for ethicists, scientists, and policymakers who use this idea defend ethical rules or policies pertaining to the conduct of research. While the notion that public trusts science makes sense in the abstract, it may not be sufficiently focused to support the various rules and policies that authors have tried to derive from it, because the public is not a uniform body with a common set of interests. (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  32. David B. Resnik (2011). Reopening Old Divisions. American Journal of Bioethics 11 (6):19 - 21.
    The American Journal of Bioethics, Volume 11, Issue 6, Page 19-21, June 2011.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  33. David B. Resnik (2011). Review of Gene Transfer and the Ethics of First-in-Human Research. [REVIEW] Studies in Ethics, Law, and Technology 5 (1).
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  34. David B. Resnik & Zubin Master (2011). Bioethics Authorship Guidelines Response. Journal of Medical Ethics 37 (7):449-449.
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  35. David B. Resnik & Zubin Master (2011). Criteria for Authorship in Bioethics. American Journal of Bioethics 11 (10):17 - 21.
    Multiple authorship is becoming increasingly common in bioethics research. There are well-established criteria for authorship in empirical bioethics research but not for conceptual research. It is important to develop criteria for authorship in conceptual publications to prevent undeserved authorship and uphold standards of fairness and accountability. This article explores the issue of multiple authorship in bioethics and develops criteria for determining who should be an author on a conceptual publication in bioethics. Authorship in conceptual research should be based on contributing (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  36. Fawaz Mzayek & David Resnik (2010). International Biomedical Research and Research Ethics Training in Developing Countries. Journal of Clinical Research and Bioethics 1 (1).
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  37. David Resnik (2010). Practical and Political Problems With a Global Research Tax. American Journal of Bioethics 10 (6):44-45.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  38. David Resnik (2010). Public Trust as a Policy Goal for Research With Human Subjects. American Journal of Bioethics 10 (6):15-17.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  39. David Resnik (2010). Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “Trans Fat Bans and Human Freedom”. American Journal of Bioethics 10 (3):4-5.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  40. David Resnik (2010). Trans Fat Bans and Human Freedom. American Journal of Bioethics 10 (3):27-32.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  41. David B. Resnik (2010). Can Scientists Regulate the Publication of Dual Use Research? Studies in Ethics, Law, and Technology 4 (1).
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  42. David B. Resnik (2010). Genomic Research Data: Open Vs. Restricted Access. Irb 32 (1):1.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  43. David B. Resnik (2010). Protecting Privacy and Confidentiality in Environmental Health Research. Ethics in Biology, Engineering and Medicine 1 (4):285-291.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  44. David B. Resnik (2010). Review of Who Owns You?: The Corporate Gold Rush to Patent Your Genes. [REVIEW] Studies in Ethics, Law, and Technology 4 (1).
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  45. David B. Resnik (2010). Review of Nanoethics: Big Ethical Issues with Small Technology. [REVIEW] Studies in Ethics, Law, and Technology 4 (2).
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  46. Weiqin Zeng & David Resnik (2010). Research Integrity in China: Problems and Prospects. Developing World Bioethics 10 (3):164-171.
    In little more than 30 years, China has recovered from the intellectual stagnation brought about by the Cultural Revolution to become a global leader in science and technology. Like other leading countries in science and technology, China has encountered some ethical problems related to the conduct of research. China's leaders have taken some steps to respond to these problems, such as developing ethics policies and establishing oversight committees. To keep moving forward, China needs to continue to take effective action to (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  47. D. B. Resnik (2009). Re-Consenting Human Subjects: Ethical, Legal and Practical Issues. Journal of Medical Ethics 35 (11):656-657.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  48. David Resnik (2009). Direct-to-Consumer Genomics, Social Networking, and Confidentiality. American Journal of Bioethics 9 (6):45-46.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  49. David B. Resnik (2009). The Clinical Investigator-Subject Relationship: A Contextual Approach. Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine 4 (1):16-.
    BackgroundThe nature of the relationship between a clinical investigator and a research subject has generated considerable debate because the investigator occupies two distinct roles: clinician and scientist. As a clinician, the investigator has duties to provide the patient with optimal care and undivided loyalty. As a scientist, the investigator has duties to follow the rules, procedures and methods described in the protocol.Results and conclusionIn this article, I present a contextual approach to the investigator-subject relationship. The extent of the investigator's duty (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  50. David B. Resnik (2009). Bioethics and Global Climate Change. Bioethics Forum 39 (3):1.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
1 — 50 / 166