The Nuremberg Code, the World Medical Association’s declarations of Geneva and Helsinki, and the Belmont Report share an origin in the Holocaust.

Immorally acquired information, from Nazi experimentation or other sources, infects the body of scientific and biomedical knowledge.

The Holocaust differs from other instances of mass murder in that it was medically sanctioned genocide.

Guidance from the Code addresses legitimacy and trustworthiness of information from unethical experimentation.

Clinicians must avoid violating professional ethical principles and patients’ legal rights and they may not ever discriminate. So, what does that mean in practice?

Allocating resources for interventions requires consensus among stakeholders with a plurality of perspectives about how to weigh antimicrobial stewardship interventions’ risks and benefits.

Researchers and scholars should co-develop research with Indigenous peoples to ensure respect for culture, language, and ways of knowing.

Focusing on social processes contributing to marginalization can help clinicians and policy makers mitigate food insecurity risk through improved patient-centered care.

Produce prescription programs can expand patient's food choices and provide financial incentives to change consumption behaviors. If these programs are not linked to established government assistance programs, however, growers could be at risks for bearing the cost.

Therapeutic misconception—a false belief that individuals will benefit from participating in research—can bias informed consent. Ethics consultants can help by engaging participants’ and researchers’ understandings of risks and benefits and by asking good questions about the influences of researchers’ enthusiasm.