Bjorg Thorsteinsdottir, MD, Annika Beck, and Jon C. Tilburt, MD, MPH
Good clinicians understand why a patient is asking for a test or treatment, and their skillful counseling can often stem the tide of requests for marginally beneficial tests and procedures.
AMA J Ethics. 2015;17(11):1028-1034. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2015.17.11.ecas2-1511.
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?"
Dr Whitney Riley Linsenmeyer joins Ethics Talk to discuss her article, coauthored with Dr Sarah Garwood: “Patient-Centered Approaches to Using BMI to Evaluate Gender-Affirming Surgery Eligibility.”
Lee C. Zhao, MD, Gaines Blasdel, Augustus Parker, and Rachel Bluebond-Langner, MD
Tension between realistic goals and unrealistic views about how to achieve them is compounded when patients are eager to revise a prior surgeon’s gender-affirming procedure.
AMA J Ethics. 2023;25(6):E391-397. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2023.391.
Maureen Kelley, PhD discusses the dual-use dilemma in infectious disease research. The same scientific information or products intended for good can also fall into the wrong hands and be used to threaten a population in an act of bioterrorism.
This article asks whether the benefits of neuroelectronic devices that restore function outweigh their risks to the individual and society and whether we should move beyond therapy to enhance our capabilities by the use of such devices?