21 found
Sort by:
See also:
Profile: Fred Gifford (Michigan State University)
  1. Fred Gifford (2014). Locating the Right Rationale: Phase I. American Journal of Bioethics 14 (12):12-13.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Fred Gifford (2011). Introduction. In , Philosophy of Medicine. Elsevier.
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Fred Gifford (ed.) (2011). Philosophy of Medicine. Elsevier.
    This volume covers a wide range of conceptual, epistemological and methodological issues in the philosophy of science raised by reflection upon medical science and practice.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Fred Gifford & Ana Rodriguez (2011). Bioethics in Costa Rica : Origins and Challenges. In Catherine Myser (ed.), Bioethics Around the Globe. Oxford University Press.
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Fred Gifford & Ana Rodriguez (2011). Origins and Challenges. In Catherine Myser (ed.), Bioethics Around the Globe. Oxford University Press. 120.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Fred Gifford (2008). Ethical Issues in Enhancement Research. Journal of Evolution and Technology 18 (1):42-49.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Fred Gifford (2007). Medicine Meets the Golem. Metascience 16 (2):277-279.
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Fred Gifford (2007). Pulling the Plug on Clinical Equipoise: A Critique of Miller and Weijer. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 17 (3):203-226.
    : As clinicians, researchers, bioethicists, and members of society, we face a number of moral dilemmas concerning randomized clinical trials. How we manage the starting and stopping of such trials—how we conceptualize what evidence is sufficient for these decisions—has implications for both our obligations to trial participants and for the nature and security of the resultant medical knowledge. One view of how this is to be done, "clinical equipoise," recently has been given an extended defense by Paul Miller and Charles (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Fred Gifford (2007). So-Called "Clinical Equipoise" and the Argument From Design. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 32 (2):135 – 150.
    In this article, I review and expand upon arguments showing that Freedman's so-called "clinical equipoise" criterion cannot serve as an appropriate guide and justification for the moral legitimacy of carrying out randomized clinical trials. At the same time, I try to explain why this approach has been given so much credence despite compelling arguments against it, including the fact that Freedman's original discussion framed the issues in a misleading way, making certain things invisible: Clinical equipoise is conflated with community equipoise, (...)
    Direct download (13 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Fred Gifford (2000). Animal Care Ethics, ANZCCART, and Public Perceptions of Animal Use Ethics. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 13 (3-4):249-257.
    The public attitude to animal use in Australia and New Zealandcan be inferred from survey results and political activity. The publicis concerned about the rights of animals as far as any uses causing painare concerned, but takes a more utilitarian view of the taking of lifewhere no suffering is involved. Many of the participants in two recentANZCCART conferences fall short in their knowledge of and attitudetoward these concerns. Animal welfare legislation and standards need tobe reformed so that painful animal use (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Fred Gifford (2000). Freedman's 'Clinical Equipoise' and Sliding-Scale All-Dimensions-Considered Equipoise'. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 25 (4):399 – 426.
    It is often claimed that a clinical investigator may ethically participate (e.g., enroll patients) in a trial only if she is in equipoise (if she has no way to ground a preference for one arm of the study). But this is a serious problem, for as data accumulate, it can be expected that there will be a discernible trend favoring one of the treatments prior to the point where we achieve the trial's objective. In this paper, I critically evaluate Benjamin (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Fred Gifford (2000). Paul Thompson, Food Biotechnology in Ethical Perspective, London: Blackie Academic and Professional, 1997. [REVIEW] Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 13 (3-4):341-347.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Fred Gifford (1996). Book Review:Discovery and Explanation in Biology and Medicine Kenneth F. Schaffner. [REVIEW] Philosophy of Science 63 (1):147-.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Fred Gifford (1996). Outcomes Research and Practice Guidelines: Upstream Issues for Downstream Users. Hastings Center Report 26 (2):38-44.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. Fred Gifford (1995). Community-Equipoise and the Ethics of Randomized Clinical Trials. Bioethics 9 (2):127–148.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. Fred Gifford (1990). Genetic Traits. Biology and Philosophy 5 (3):327-347.
    Recognizing that all traits are the result of an interaction between genes and environment, I offer a set of criteria for nevertheless making sense of our practice of singling out certain traits as genetic ones, in effect making a distinction between causes and mere conditions. The central criterion is that a trait is genetic if it is genetic differences that make the differences in that trait variable in a given population. A second criterion requires that genetic traits be individuated in (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. Fred Gifford (1989). Complex Genetic Causation of Human Disease: Critiques of and Rationales for Heritability and Path Analysis. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 10 (2).
    This paper examines some criticisms that have been made of two standard genetic methodologies: heritability and path analysis. I conclude that the criticisms should be taken seriously, concerning both the accuracy of heritability measures and their significance. In light of the fact that such studies remain prominent in the literature, I consider what possible rationale they can retain consistent with these criticisms. In particular, I consider (1) a role in the identification of high-risk individuals and (2) a heuristic role in (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  18. Fred Gifford (1988). Book Review:The Sociobiology of Ethnocentrism: Evolutionary Dimensions of Xenophobia, Discrimination, Racism and Nationalism. Vernon Reynolds, Vincent Fagler, Ian Vine. [REVIEW] Ethics 99 (1):183-.
  19. Fred Gifford (1988). Bryan G. Norton, Ed.: The Preservation of Species. Environmental Ethics 10 (1):91-94.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. Fred Gifford (1986). Sober's Use of Unanimity in the Units of Selection Problem. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1986:473 - 482.
    Sober argues that the units of selection problem in evolutionary biology is to be understood and solved by applying the general analysis of what it means for C to cause E in a population. The account he utilizes is the unanimity account, according to which C causes E in a population when C raises the probability of E in each causal context. I argue that he does not succeed here, both because the unanimity account is not well grounded in the (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  21. Fred Gifford (1986). The Conflict Between Randomized Clinical Trials and the Therapeutic Obligation. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 11 (4):347-366.
    The central dilemma concerning randomized clinical trials (RCTs) arises out of some simple facts about causal methodology (RCTs are the best way to generate the reliable causal knowledge necessary for optimally-informed action) and a prima facie plausible principle concerning how physicians should treat their patients (always do what it is most reasonable to believe will be best for the patient). A number of arguments related to this in the literature are considered. Attempts to avoid the dilemma fail. Appeals to informed (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation