Streamlining US health care business has raised unique privacy concerns. Bills and explanations of benefits contain protected health information that could be disclosed to someone other than the patient.
AMA J Ethics. 2016;18(3):279-287. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2016.18.3.pfor4-1603.
Conflicts of interest must be acknowledged with sincerity and earnestness and managed such that the conflict is eliminated or, at least, credibly mitigated.
AMA J Ethics. 2023;25(3):E186-193. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2023.186.
How can clinicians respond to the health challenges associated with global climate change? This month on Ethics Talk, we learn about how art can communicate the health effects of climate change, the challenges that hot and humid days pose for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and what the global health risk of climate change means for individual clinicians.
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.
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.
When a patient challenges the use of a reusable, stainless steel speculum rather than a plastic, throw-away one, the physician should educate her on the safety and environmental benefits of reusable medical devices.