125 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). H5N1 Avian Flu ESEARCH. Hastings Center Report.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. David B. Resnik & Susan A. Elmore (forthcoming). Ensuring the Quality, Fairness, and Integrity of Journal Peer Review: A Possible Role of Editors. Science and Engineering Ethics:1-20.
    A growing body of literature has identified potential problems that can compromise the quality, fairness, and integrity of journal peer review, including inadequate review, inconsistent reviewer reports, reviewer biases, and ethical transgressions by reviewers. We examine the evidence concerning these problems and discuss proposed reforms, including double-blind and open review. Regardless of the outcome of additional research or attempts at reforming the system, it is clear that editors are the linchpin of peer review, since they make decisions that have a (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. 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  
  4. David B. Resnik (2015). Food and Beverage Policies and Public Health Ethics. Health Care Analysis 23 (2):122-133.
    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: the policy serves important social goal; the policy (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. David B. Resnik (2015). Retracting Inconclusive Research: Lessons From the Séralini GM Maize Feeding Study. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 28 (4):621-633.
    In September 2012, Gilles-Eric Séralini and seven coauthors published an article in Food and Chemical Toxicology claiming that rats fed Roundup©-resistant genetically modified maize alone, genetically modified maize with Roundup©, or Roundup© for 2 years had a higher percentage of tumors and kidney and liver damage than normal controls. Shortly after this study was published, numerous scientists and several scientific organizations criticized the research as methodologically and ethically flawed. In January 2014, the journal retracted the article without the authors’ consent (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. David B. Resnik & Kevin C. Elliott (2015). Bisphenol A and Risk Management Ethics. Bioethics 29 (3):182-189.
    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  
  7. David B. Resnik (2014). Is Weapons Research Immoral? Metascience 23 (1):105-107.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. 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  
  9. 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  
  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.
  13. David B. Resnik (2013). . Philosophical Explorations 7 (1).
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. 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  
  15. 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  
  16. 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  
  17. 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  
  18. 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  
  19. David B. Resnik (2012). Environmental Health Ethics. Cambridge University Press.
    Environmental Health Ethics illuminates the conflicts between protecting the environment and promoting human health. In this study, David B. Resnik develops a method for making ethical decisions on environmental health issues. He applies this method to various issues, including pesticide use, antibiotic resistance, nutrition policy, vegetarianism, urban development, occupational safety, disaster preparedness and global climate change. Resnik provides readers with the scientific and technical background necessary to understand these issues. He explains that environmental health controversies cannot simply be reduced to (...)
    No categories
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. 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  
  21. 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  
  22. 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  
  23. David B. Resnik (2012). Paternalism and Utilitarianism in Research with Human Participants. Health Care Analysis (1):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  
  24. David B. Resnik (2012). Responsible Conduct in Nanomedicine Research: Environmental Concerns Beyond the Common Rule. Journal of Law, Medicine & 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  
  25. 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  
  26. David B. Resnik, Gwen Babson & Gregg E. Dinse (2012). Minor Changes to Previously Approved Research: A Study of IRB Policies. IRB: Ethics & Human Research 34 (4):9.
    We examined institutional review board policies from the top U.S. research universities to determine how many have policies that define or provide examples of what constitutes a “minor change” to previously approved research. We sought to describe differences among definitions and to ascertain whether funding level, accreditation, public versus private status, and geographic region impact the inclusion of a definition or example of this term. Of the 184 universities that we obtained policies from, 52.2% defined “minor change,” 43.5% gave examples (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  27. 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  
  28. 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  
  29. David B. Resnik & Zubin Master (2011). Bioethics Authorship Guidelines Response. Journal of Medical Ethics 37 (7):449-449.
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  30. 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  
  31. David B. Resnik (2010). Can Scientists Regulate the Publication of Dual Use Research? Studies in Ethics, Law, and Technology 4 (1).
    The growing threat of the misuse of science and technology for terrorist or criminal purposes has led scientists, institutions, professional organizations, funding agencies, journals, and governments to consider how best to control research that can be readily used to cause significant harm to public health, the economy, the environment, or national security, also known as dual use research. This commentary argues that scientists can regulate dual use research, provided that they are committed to developing effective dual use policies and a (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  32. David B. Resnik (2010). Genomic Research Data: Open Vs. Restricted Access. IRB: Ethics & Human Research 32 (1):1.
    Openness is one of science’s fundamental ethical norms, but it should not take precedence over the obligation to protect the confidentiality of data. Deidentifying the data obtained from human genomic research as a condition of providing open access to research data is a strategy to promote scientific openness while protecting research participants’ confidentiality interests. However, given recent advances in methods of reidentifying individuals whose deidentified data are in genomic databases, the best way to balance scientific openness and protection of human (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  33. David B. Resnik (2010). Protecting Privacy and Confidentiality in Environmental Health Research. Ethics in Biology, Engineering and Medicine 1 (4):285-291.
  34. 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  
  35. 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  
  36. 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  
  37. David B. Resnik (2009). Bioethics and Global Climate Change. Bioethics Forum 39 (3):1.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  38. David B. Resnik (2009). Human Health and the Environment: In Harmony or in Conflict? [REVIEW] Health Care Analysis 17 (3):261-276.
    Health policy frameworks usually construe environmental protection and human health as harmonious values. Policies that protect the environment, such as pollution control and pesticide regulation, also benefit human health. In recent years, however, it has become apparent that promoting human health sometimes undermines environmental protection. Some actions, policies, or technologies that reduce human morbidity, mortality, and disease can have detrimental effects on the environment. Since human health and environmental protection are sometimes at odds, political leaders, citizens, and government officials need (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  39. David B. Resnik (2009). Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine. Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine 4:16.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  40. David B. Resnik (2009). Playing Politics with Science: Balancing Scientific Independence and Government Oversight. Oxford University Press.
    In Playing Politics with Science, David B. Resnik explores the philosophical, political, and ethical issues related to the politicalization of science and ...
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  41. David B. Resnik (2009). Review of Rescuing Science From Politics. [REVIEW] Studies in Ethics, Law, and Technology 3 (2).
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  42. David B. Resnik (2009). Review of Rethinking Informed Consent in Bioethics. [REVIEW] Studies in Ethics, Law, and Technology 3 (2).
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  43. David B. Resnik (2009). What is “Dual Use” Research? A Response to Miller and Selgelid. Science and Engineering Ethics 15 (1):3-5.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  44. Haavi Morreim, Rebecca Dresser, David B. Resnik & Robert J. Wells (2008). The Sex Kitten of Bioethics?: Research Ethics Comes of Age. Hastings Center Report 38 (5):4-6.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  45. David B. Resnik (2008). Closing Loopholes in the Federal Research Regulations: Some Practical Problems. American Journal of Bioethics 8 (11):6 – 8.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  46. David B. Resnik (2008). Research Ethics Consultation at the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. American Journal of Bioethics 8 (3):40 – 42.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  47. David B. Resnik (2008). Review of Biotechnology and the Human Good. [REVIEW] Studies in Ethics, Law, and Technology 2 (1).
    Biotechnology and the Human Good by C. Ben Mitchell, Edmund D. Pellegrino, Jean Bethke Elshstain, and Scott B. Rae is a thoughtful, carefully argued perspective on the ethics of new developments in biotechnology, such as human enhancement, human germ-line engineering, cloning, nanotechnology, and cybernetics.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  48. David B. Resnik (2008). Scientific Autonomy and Public Oversight. Episteme 5 (2):pp. 220-238.
    When scientific research collides with social values, science's right to self-governance becomes an issue of paramount concern. In this article, I develop an account of scientific autonomy within a framework of public oversight. I argue that scientific autonomy is justified because it promotes the progress of science, which benefits society, but that restrictions on autonomy can also be justified to prevent harm to people, society, or the environment, and to encourage beneficial research. I also distinguish between different ways of limiting (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  49. David B. Resnik, Christina Gutierrez-Ford & Shyamal Peddada (2008). Perceptions of Ethical Problems with Scientific Journal Peer Review: An Exploratory Study. Science and Engineering Ethics 14 (3):305-310.
    This article reports the results of an anonymous survey of researchers at a government research institution concerning their perceptions about ethical problems with journal peer review. Incompetent review was the most common ethical problem reported by the respondents, with 61.8% (SE = 3.3%) claiming to have experienced this at some point during peer review. Bias (50.5%, SE = 3.4%) was the next most common problem. About 22.7% (SE = 2.8%) of respondents said that a reviewer had required them to include (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  50. David B. Resnik, Shyamal Peddada, Jason Altilio, Nancy Wang & Jerry Menikoff (2008). Oncology Consent Forms: Failure to Disclose Off-Site Treatment Availability. IRB: Ethics & Human Research 30 (6):7.
    The objective of this study was to determine whether consent forms in oncology clinical trials of commercially available treatments inform subjects that they may be able to obtain the treatments being investigated without participating in research. We acquired consent forms from a random sample of U.S. oncology clinical trials in the ClinicalTrials.gov database. We then examined a subgroup of the sample consisting of studies in which the treatments under investigations were commercially available. Less than 20% of the consent forms in (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
1 — 50 / 125