When the health care industry came under the environmental microscope, the daily work of treating patients was discovered to be highly wasteful of natural and financial resources.
Public and private choices about allocation of funds for research raise a social-justice question: are these funding sources making fair decisions about where to invest their resources? The NIH has the clearest obligation to do so because it is taxpayer-supported.
The question that comes to mind when one considers the risks of a clinical trial is, “Why would anyone agree to participate?” Interviews with trial volunteers and their family members make clear that often it is the appeal of discovering something new and unknown.
Clara C. Hildebrandt, MD and Jonathan M. Marron, MD, MPH
Gene editing with CRISPR/Cas9 raises concerns about equitable access to therapies that could limit research participation by minority group members. These concerns can be addressed through public education, transparency, and stakeholder partnerships.
AMA J Ethics. 2018;20(9):E826-833. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2018.826.
Dr Joshua D. Safer joins Ethics Talk to discuss his article, coauthored with Rebkah Tesfamariam: “How Should a Transgender Patient’s History of Deep Vein Thrombosis and Smoking Influence Gender-Affirming Health Decision Sharing?”
Dr Whitney Riley Linsenmeyer joins Ethics Talk to discuss her article, coauthored with Dr Sarah Garwood: “Patient-Centered Approaches to Using BMI to Evaluate Gender-Affirming Surgery Eligibility.”
Jennifer Aldrich, MD, Jessica Kant, MSW, LICSW, MPH, and Eric Gramszlo
Estelle v Gamble (1976) reiterates that the 8th Amendment to the US Constitution requires adequate care to be offered to all people who are incarcerated.
AMA J Ethics. 2023;25(6):E407-413. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2023.407.