Skip to main content

Future Medicine: Towards a More Conscious and Ethical Communication

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Improving Technology Through Ethics

Part of the book series: SpringerBriefs in Applied Sciences and Technology ((BRIEFSPOLIMI))

  • 53 Accesses

Abstract

Over the past decade, the integration of nanotechnology into medicine, known as nanomedicine, has revolutionized diagnostic and therapeutic techniques, offering potential solutions for currently incurable diseases. Cutting-edge approaches such as gene therapy, the use of nucleic acids as therapeutic agents, and the use of nano systems as shuttles for drug delivery have garnered significant attention in the research community. Some of these nano-therapies have even reached clinical application, transitioning from the realm of specialized experts to benefiting the general public, patients, and their families. However, these advancements have also raised ethical and social concerns, as particularly highlighted by the COVID-19 pandemic, which has evidenced how the introduction of novel medical techniques prompted critical questions surrounding ethics, transparency, and human dignity. The manner in which nanotechnology research and applications are introduced to society, the ethical responsibility of professionals, and the way health and social issues are addressed can greatly impact public trust and the future of medical innovation. This chapter aims to analyze and emphasize the importance of ethics and transparent communication in medical innovation, as well as the crucial role of scientists, researchers, and doctors in understanding their ethical and social responsibilities and the influential power their opinions hold in society. By fostering credible communication, it is possible to shape a fair and transparent progress while mitigating public fear, prejudice, and backlash. Effective and simple communication, along with the utmost respect for the well-being of humans and animals throughout all stages of research development, should shape the future of medicine.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Doxil®, a nanodrug based on a lipid nano-vector containing a chemotherapeutic drug.

  2. 2.

    Theranostics is a term formed by the word “therapeutics” and “diagnosis”. Theranostics systems are nanoscale platforms able to integrate both diagnosis and treatment of a specific pathology.

References

  1. Pautler M, Brenner S (2010) Nanomedicine: promises and challenges for the future of public health. Int J Nanomed 5:803–809

    Google Scholar 

  2. Soares S, Sousa J, Pais A, Vitorino C (2018) Nanomedicine: principles, properties, and regulatory issues. Front Chem 6(360)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Jiang L, Carmichaels KA (2019) Innovating nanoethics. AMA J Ethics® 21(4):313–316

    Google Scholar 

  4. AIFA homepage. https://www.aifa.gov.it/vaccini-covid-19. Last accessed 06 Apr 2023

  5. Huang X, Kong N, Zhang X, Cao Y, Langer R, Tao W (2022) The landscape of mRNA nanomedicine. Nat Med 28:2273–2287

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Kazemi A, Majidinia M, Jamali AA (2014) The question of ethics in nanomedicine. J Clinic Res Bioeth 5:193

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Resnik DB, Tinkle SS (2007) Ethics in nanomedicine. Nanomedicine (Lond) 2(3):345–350

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Van Calster G (2006) Regulating nanotechnology in the European Union. Nanotechnol, Low Bus 3(3):359–372

    Google Scholar 

  9. Ponce Del Catillo AM (2009) Nanos in the human body—medical perspectives and ethical concerns. HesaMag #01

    Google Scholar 

  10. OECD website. https://www.oecd.org/coronavirus/policy-responses/transparency-communication-and-trust-the-role-of-public-communication-in-responding-to-the-wave-of-disinformation-about-the-new-coronavirus-bef7ad6e/. Last accessed 06 Apr 2023

  11. Porat T, Nyrup R, Calvo RA, Paudyal P, Ford E (2020) Public health and risk communication during COVID-19—enhancing psychological needs to promote sustainable behavior change. Front Public Health 8:573397

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Emanuel EJ, Upshur REG, Smith MJ (2022) What Covid has taught the world about ethics. N Engl J Med 387(17):1542–1545

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Venkatashiva RB, Gupta A (2020) Importance of effective communication during COVID-19 infodemic. J Family Med Prim Care 9:3793–3796

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Resnik DB (2015) Bioethical issues in providing financial incentives to research participants. Medicoleg Bioeth 5:35–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Central University Research Ethics Committee (CUREC). https://researchsupport.admin.ox.ac.uk/files/bpg05paymentsandincentivesinresearchv10pdf. Last accessed 25 Aug 2023

  16. AIRC. https://www.airc.it/cancro/affronta-la-malattia/come-affrontare-la-malattia/studi-clinici. Last accessed 06 Apr 2023

  17. NHS Clinical trials homepage. https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/clinical-trials/. Last accessed 06 Apr 2023

  18. Informed consent—European Commission. https://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/fp7/89807/informed-consent_en.pdf. Last accessed 06 Apr 2023

  19. Shah P, Thornton I, Turrin D et al (2022) Informed consent. In: StatPearls [Internet]. StatPearls Publishing, Treasure Island (FL)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Petryna A (2007) Clinical trials offshored: on private sector science and public health. BioSocieties 2:21–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. NIH website. https://www.nia.nih.gov/health/what-are-clinical-trials-and-stu-ies#:~:text=Clinical%20trials%20are%20research%20studies,safe%20and%20effective%20in%20people. Last accessed 06 Apr 2023

  22. Juma C (2016) Innovation and its enemies: why people resist new technologies, 1st edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford; New York

    Google Scholar 

  23. Boddice R (2016) Vaccination, fear and historical relevance. Hist Compass 14(2):71–78

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. NIH website. https://www.niehs.nih.gov/research/resources/bioethics/whatis/index.cfm. Last accessed 14 June 2023

  25. Steneck NH (2007) Introduction to the responsible conduct of research. Revised edition. https://ori.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/2018-04/rcrintro.pdf

  26. Doemeny L, Knerr P (2017) The importance of ethical conduct in scientific research. American Chemical Society

    Google Scholar 

  27. Sauer MA, Truelove S, Gerste AK, Limaye RJ (2021) A failure to communicate? How public messaging has strained the COVID-19 response in the United States. Health Secur 19(1):65–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Gülcan NY (2015) Discussing the importance of teaching ethics in education. Soc Behav Sci 174:2622–2625

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Nelson T, Kagan N, Critchlow C, Hillard A, Hsu A (2020) The danger of misinformation in the COVID-19 crisis. Mo Med 117(6):510–512

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Beatrice Lucia Bona .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Bona, B.L. (2024). Future Medicine: Towards a More Conscious and Ethical Communication. In: Chiodo, S., Kaiser, D., Shah, J., Volonté, P. (eds) Improving Technology Through Ethics. SpringerBriefs in Applied Sciences and Technology(). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-52962-7_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics