Biodefence and the production of knowledge: rethinking the problem

Journal of Medical Ethics 39 (4):195-204 (2013)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Next SectionBiodefence, broadly understood as efforts to prevent or mitigate the damage of a bioterrorist attack, raises a number of ethical issues, from the allocation of scarce biomedical research and public health funds, to the use of coercion in quarantine and other containment measures in the event of an outbreak. In response to the US bioterrorist attacks following September 11, significant US policy decisions were made to spur scientific enquiry in the name of biodefence. These decisions led to a number of critical institutional changes within the US federal government agencies governing scientific research. Subsequent science policy discussions have focused largely on ‘the dual use problem’: how to preserve the openness of scientific research while preventing research undertaken for the prevention or mitigation of biological threats from third parties. We join others in shifting the ethical debate over biodefence away from a simple framing of the problem as one of dual use, by demonstrating how a dual use framing distorts the debate about bioterrorism and truncates discussion of the moral issues. We offer an alternative framing rooted in social epistemology and institutional design theory, arguing that the ethical and policy debates regarding ‘dual use’ biomedical research ought to be reframed as a larger optimisation problem across a plurality of values including, among others: (1) the production of scientific knowledge; (2) the protection of human and animal subjects; (3) the promotion and protection of public health (national and global); (4) freedom of scientific enquiry; and (5) the constraint of government power

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,127

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2011-12-23

Downloads
12 (#1,115,280)

6 months
34 (#104,348)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Allen Buchanan
University of Arizona

References found in this work

Knowledge in a social world.Alvin I. Goldman - 1991 - New York: Oxford University Press.
Two concepts of rules.John Rawls - 1955 - Philosophical Review 64 (1):3-32.
The fable of the bees.Bernard Mandeville (ed.) - 1714 - Harmondsworth,: Penguin Books.
Human rights and global health: A research program.Thomas W. Pogge - 2005 - Metaphilosophy 36 (1‐2):182-209.

View all 6 references / Add more references