Physician advocacy for climate change mitigation is justified by seven criteria including physicians’ efficacy, expertise, public trust, and proximity.
AMA J Ethics. 2017; 19(12):1202-1210. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2017.19.12.msoc1-1712.
Climate change mitigation reforms of government policy, medical curricula, and health professions organizations should be the focus of physician advocacy.
AMA J Ethics. 2017; 19(12):1222-1237. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2017.19.12.sect1-1712.
The adverse health effects of climate change should be the focus of physician advocacy efforts and of conversations between physicians and their patients.
AMA J Ethics. 2017; 19(12):1174-1182. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2017.19.12.ecas3-1712.
Although identical twin-to-twin skin grafting has resulted in excellent survival rates in burn patients, the nature and scope of ethical decision making in monozygotic sibling skin grafting needs further examination.
AMA J Ethics. 2018; 20(6):537-545. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2018.20.6.cscm2-1806.
Gene editing to enhance humans’ adaptability to climate change should consider safety, harm to be averted, succeeding generations, and social consequences.
AMA J Ethics. 2017; 19(12):1186-1192. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2017.19.12.stas1-1712.
Public health and climate stabilization historically have competed for public funds, but investment in either good has the potential to advance both goods.
AMA J Ethics. 2017; 19(12):1193-1201. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2017.19.12.pfor1-1712.
Jonathan Giftos, MD, Andreas Mitchell, and Ross MacDonald, MD
A correctional health educational initiative for medical students and residents, as well as curriculum development and physician advocacy, is discussed.
AMA J Ethics. 2017; 19(9):913-921. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2017.19.9.medu1-1709.