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?"
A lack of consensus guidelines or a belief that current evidence does not support such guidelines might be justified if a clinician expresses a commitment to patient-centered care and shared decision making.
AMA J Ethics. 2018;20(11):E1007-1016. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2018.1007.
In the 1910s, the American Medical Association fought quackery promoted in pamphlets for drugs and treatments for everything from teething to epilepsy.
AMA J Ethics. 2018;20(11):E1082-1093. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2018.1082.
Although identical twin-to-twin skin grafting has resulted in excellent survival rates in burn patients, the nature and scope of ethical decision making in monozygotic sibling skin grafting needs further examination.
AMA J Ethics. 2018;20(6):537-545. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2018.20.6.cscm2-1806.
After the infant’s birth, the neonatologist’s first duty is to his or her patient—the newly born infant. If clinical circumstances are different than anticipated, the physician must first consider the best interests of the baby.