Dr Daphne Mlachila joins Ethics Talk to discuss her article: “How Should Clinicians and Researchers in Government Respond to Threats to Their Offices?”
Professor Wendy E. Parmet joins Ethics Talk to discuss her article, coauthored with Dr Claudia E. Haupt: “Holding Clinicians in Public Office Accountable to Professional Standards.”
Dr Isabelle Freiling joins Ethics Talk to discuss her article, coauthored with Nicole M. Krause and Dr Dietram A. Scheufele: “Science and Ethics of ‘Curing’ Misinformation.”
The question of whether and how results from personal genetic testing will motivate behavioral changes in consumers has only begun to receive the research attention it richly deserves.
Kyle B. Brothers, MD, PhD and Esther E. Knapp, MD, MBE
Direct-to-consumer genetic testing requires that physicians share decision making with patients, not order unnecessary tests or interventions, and refer to genetic specialists when necessary.
AMA J Ethics. 2018;20(9):E812-818. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2018.812.
Mandatory genetic testing of health care professionals could help structure health care organizations’ responses to a pandemic. Patients and more susceptible employees can benefit, and these benefits must be weighed against concerns about fairness, autonomy, genetic privacy, and potential loss of employment opportunities.
AMA J Ethics. 2018;20(9):E819-825. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2018.819.
Holly K. Tabor, PhD and Aaron Goldenberg, PhD, MPH
Rare genetic disease research has something to teach precision medicine about addressing some patients’ limited access to treatment. Health disparities exacerbated by high costs and limited availability of drugs can, perhaps, be mitigated when patient activism accelerates drug development.
AMA J Ethics. 2018;20(9):E834-840. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2018.834.