"The principle that sustains compulsory vaccination is broad enough to cover cutting the Fallopian tubes." - Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr, Buck v. Bell, 1927
i'm going to make a sweeping generalization here so forgive me- i think all scientists, doctors, researchers, etc have it within them to cross the line into unethical research. they WANT to know so badly. did fauci REALLY need to know what would happen to beagles attacked by sand flies? what would the real world application of this "knowledge" be? dogs that are not tied down with a glass case over their faces to keep the bugs concentrated there can run around and escape a massive onslaught of biting flies. but scientists WANT to know.
is there really a reason for Peter Daszak to find EVERY POSSIBLE virus that might be lurking in some remote caves, to bring them back to major populated centers and amp them up in infectiousness and severity and try to develop vaccines just in case for viruses that NEVER in a million years would have bothered humans if he had just left them alone?
not really, but if he isn't the virus hunter then what is he? on what basis does he get grants? what does he do all day?
much of our medical knowledge that is in practice today comes from nazi experiments (or tortures) in the death camps. oh, that pesky constitution, those problematic nuremberg codes, those damn IRBs! wouldn't it be so much easier if "noble" scientists could just do research on animals and people without having to worry about ethics? oh, the things they could discover! the knowledge.
i have very little faith in science to behave in an ethical manner
I agree, Carolyn. Not only are many scientists fudging outcomes to suit funders, they are also messing with things that just shouldn't be messed with. Also, when the term "science" becomes more like a faith-based belief system (rather than just a means to gain knowledge) bad motives can hide behind it. This is unfortunate, because I really like good, ethical science. I think there needs to be much more attention paid to the issue you raise.
i'm going to make a sweeping generalization here so forgive me- i think all scientists, doctors, researchers, etc have it within them to cross the line into unethical research. they WANT to know so badly. did fauci REALLY need to know what would happen to beagles attacked by sand flies? what would the real world application of this "knowledge" be? dogs that are not tied down with a glass case over their faces to keep the bugs concentrated there can run around and escape a massive onslaught of biting flies. but scientists WANT to know.
is there really a reason for Peter Daszak to find EVERY POSSIBLE virus that might be lurking in some remote caves, to bring them back to major populated centers and amp them up in infectiousness and severity and try to develop vaccines just in case for viruses that NEVER in a million years would have bothered humans if he had just left them alone?
not really, but if he isn't the virus hunter then what is he? on what basis does he get grants? what does he do all day?
much of our medical knowledge that is in practice today comes from nazi experiments (or tortures) in the death camps. oh, that pesky constitution, those problematic nuremberg codes, those damn IRBs! wouldn't it be so much easier if "noble" scientists could just do research on animals and people without having to worry about ethics? oh, the things they could discover! the knowledge.
i have very little faith in science to behave in an ethical manner
I agree, Carolyn. Not only are many scientists fudging outcomes to suit funders, they are also messing with things that just shouldn't be messed with. Also, when the term "science" becomes more like a faith-based belief system (rather than just a means to gain knowledge) bad motives can hide behind it. This is unfortunate, because I really like good, ethical science. I think there needs to be much more attention paid to the issue you raise.
Very, very good points.
Thanks, this is a very important point and I haven't heard it before.
Bodily integrity is a human right.
Thanks for this deep-dive into the law, Ginger.