Developing technologies for personalized medicine may be misused to popularize the idea that one can infer a person’s genetic makeup from observer-defined or self-reported assignment to a race or ethnic group.
Some commentators say comparative trials of FDA-approved drugs are overburdened by current Common Rule regulations and that researchers should not be required to obtain explicit consent for participation in the most innocuous of these trials.
Developing drugs for profit is challenged in Parasites!, a patient education comic that highlights the need for unprofitable drugs for tropical diseases.
AMA J Ethics. 2018;20(2):167-175. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2018.20.2.msoc1-1802.
Neuroscience's associations between localized brain activity and specific cognitive tasks is not sufficient evidence for rejecting the notion of free will and absolving individuals of responsibility for their behavior.
Nancy Berlinger, PhD and Annalise Berlinger, BSN, RN
Physicians’ reliance on “culture” to explain patients’ noncompliance may serve as code for their discomfort with difference, uncertainty, and distress.
AMA J Ethics. 2017;19(6):608-616. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2017.19.6.msoc1-1706.
Tom Alsaigh, MD, Laura Nicholson, MD, PhD, and Eric Topol, MD
Clinicians should have a working understanding of gene editing, controversy surrounding its use, and its far-reaching clinical and ethical implications.
AMA J Ethics. 2019;21(12):E1089-1097. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2019.1089.