David Elkin, MD, Erick Hung, MD, and Gilbert Villela, MD
The rapidly evolving field of neuroethics is concerned with the ethical questions that new technologies will pose about autonomy, privacy, the definition of normal, and individuality.
Wendy Foth, Carol Waudby, and Murray H. Brilliant, PhD
Certificates of confidentiality, issued by the Department of Health and Human Services, allow researchers to refuse to disclose identifying information about research participants in any civil, legal, or other government proceeding. This level of protection is said to promote enrollment in research studies.
This month theme issue editor, Trahern Jones, a fourth-year student at Mayo Medical School in Rochester, Minnesota, spoke with Dr. Edward Laskowski about the use of performance-enhancing drugs and substances among athletes today.
Siddhartha Devarakonda, MD, Ramaswamy Govindan, MD, and Peter S. Hammerman, MD, PhD
While next-generation genome-sequencing technology has great potential to aid cancer research, ethical challenges concerning privacy and confidentiality and the ownership of inventions remain.
Is it ethical to create and advertise, either publicly or during office visits, package deals that offer patients an incentive to have procedures they are not already seeking and might not have considered?
Within the patient-physician relationship, the request for neuroenhancement becomes a chief concern, and the physician has a duty to take a history and perform a physical exam to determine whether the patient’s current level of function represents significant change.
Some question whether plastic surgeons bear responsibility for promoting suspect norms of beauty, given that certain types of cosmetic enhancements reinforce common conceptions of normality that are harmful to society.
Because regulatory approval of cognitive enhancement drugs is likely, physicians may want to consider whether they would condone the practice for restoration of function only or for enhancement purposes as well.