The risks of misinformation being spread through online patient forums can be mitigated by communication strategies aimed at physicians and organizations.
AMA J Ethics. 2017;19(11):1088-1095. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2017.19.11.ecas3-1711.
The Holocaust and the racial hygiene doctrine that helped rationalize it still overshadow contemporary debates about using gene editing for disease prevention.
AMA J Ethics. 2021;23(1):E49-54. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2021.49.
Charles E. Binkley, MD, Michael S. Politz, MA, and Brian P. Green, PhD
If the safe-and-effective standard for judging devices’ potential as therapy or enhancement is inadequate, one might wonder whether BCI regulation should be overseen by the FDA.
AMA J Ethics. 2021;23(9):E745-749. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2021.745.
Dr Charles Binkley joins Ethics Talk to discuss his article, coauthored with Michael Politz and Dr Brian Green: "Who, If Not the FDA, Should Regulate Implantable Brain-Computer Interface Devices?"
Transitions in relabeling personalized medicine as precision medicine, precision health, or wellness genomics reflect shifting the locus of responsibility for health from individuals to clinicians and in shifting focus from genetic risk to genetic enhancement.
AMA J Ethics. 2018;20(9):E881-890. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2018.881.
False health information can harm, so hosts and writers of website content, clinicians, and patients are all responsible for jointly appraising the quality of online content and preventing the spread of misinformation.
AMA J Ethics. 2018;20(11):E1059-1066. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2018.1059.