UNESCO

Well, not really. We should get back to posting within the weekend. I’ve just been swamped with college student stuff.

There has been a rumor going around that chairs will be awarding extra credit for those who post comments on these blogs. While that rumor is true in that some chairs are doing so, I will not be doing that for UNESCO, simply because I don’t think its fair to those who don’t know about this blog. (Also because I’m lazy and don’t want to keep track of it. )

However, I strongly encourage you to post comments, questions, or anything else on the blog. You may not get tangible “points”, but as chairs, we will recognize those who are active on the blog and will be more capable of helping out those who post. And besides, early name recognition is always a plus. .

-Bryan

Genetic Innovations for Tomorrow Corporation, or Gift Corp, is announcing approval by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) of Phase III clinical trials (human studies) to test a service to produce tissue and organ replacements, customized to provide an identical genetic match for its clients. Gift is also planning trials of gene therapy via engineered viruses designed to insert genes into cells to restore normal function. Gift Corp. is a private company with connections to UC Sacramento Medical School.To produce the tissue, Gift Corp. produces clones of the target tissue by purchasing eggs from female students at the university and replacing their nuclei with the nuclei of cells taken from its clients. The technique used for separating the various possible tissues from the growing embryo was patented by Egyptian scientists; however, neither their patent nor the reference to their authorship appears in publications or American patent records.During Phase II clinical trials (animal experimentation), Gift Corp reports success of transplanted tissues, but neglects to mention an observation of allergic reactions in 12.1% of clinical trials of test subjects, including dogs and rhesus monkeys. Private acknowledgements point to an incompatibility between tissue derived from human eggs and tissue found in the test subjects as the reason for the allergic reactions.

Initial trials in human subjects, conducted by UC Sacramento Medical School professor Franklin Rosalind, involve muscle replacement. Rosalind proceeded with the trials without having the trial reviewed by his institution due to the fact that he was working at a Gift Corp laboratory. He did, however, previously receive a federal grant from the National Institutes of Health to experiment with tissue cloning using federally approved stem cell lines.

The resulting papers were authored by a number of individuals including some who did not conduct experiments but helped fund the research (the Chairman of the Board and several major investors). Gift Corp also files for and receives a patent on the specific technique used in this tissue service.

While this is obviously a frabricated case, it involves several bioethical issues, including several that we will be tackling with our two topics. Don’t worry about the nuances of these issues yet though. Just give us your thoughts, supported by some of the concepts expounded upon in the “Morality, Ethics, and Culture” post.

- Bryan

There is a question about what type of sources are mandatory for the position paper. While I don’t require any particular number of sources be books or what-not, it is good to use sources that force you to actually flip some pages. Publication generally ramps up the respectability of the source, although there can be extreme exemptions (it is up to you to determine any bias).

The reason for not having this requirement is simply this; these issues are still mostly academic, and there aren’t very many concrete case studies out there. Some of the information you need cannot be found in public libraries, and while it doesn’t hurt to look, if you have to pay to use a certain journal, I’d rather you use an online source. However, a paper relying solely on online sources, especially those of poor reputation, will be looked upon unfavorably compared to one using a variety of sources.

- Bryan

p.s.: if you can get access to a University library (UC, Cal State, a local junior college like Stanford, if you’re desperate ), that is probably the best place to go to.

p.p.s.: Wikipedia will not be valid as a source, but it is a good place to go to look for other sources.

Article link.

By LINDA A. JOHNSON

 

TRENTON, N.J.

Two former sales representatives for Amgen Inc. are suing the biotech company, alleging it pushed its sales force to search doctor’s confidential medical records for potential patients to boost sales of a drug used to treat psoriasis.

The two former representatives, who are seeking lost pay, punitive damages and other compensation totaling more than $15 million apiece, allege they objected to superiors and refused to go along with the scheme, which legal experts say violates federal patient privacy law…

Amgen is a large biotechnology firm based in Thousand Oaks, CA, and is the largest independent firm in the world. According to Business week, Amgen is one of the most “future-oriented” corporations in the S&P 500. This impetus for scientific progress is clearly seen in this article, where it comes into conflict with patient’s rights. This conflict is central to your second topic, where the problem takes on a new level of international research. Its easy to see where to go to resolve the Amgen controversy (American legal system, NIH, etc…). What if this was an international controversy? Who would you go to?

-Bryan

Ethics, too, are nothing but reverence for life. This is what gives me the fundamental principle of morality, namely, that good consists in maintaining, promoting, and enhancing life, and that destroying, injuring, and limiting life are evil.

- Albert Schweitzer

Bioethics, due to its nature in dealing with relatively new issues, is a latecomer on the philosophical stage. However, the manner in which it deals with those issues is an old practice. In order to better understand the stances of the players in the topics, and in any other ethical issue as well, we have to look at how we make moral and ethical decisions. Obviously, this will be a relatively superficial look; if philosophy was easy, Cal wouldn’t offer a major in it.

There are several terms that are thrown around a lot in ethical discussions. Its important that we understand what these words really mean, in an academic sense.

Virtue -  a highly individualistic notion of ethics; can be either normative (the purpose of a being) or moral (reason, truth, value). Virtue is generally seen as being independent of any relationship with other beings, so it presents major problems of subjectivity.

Right - the set of freedoms that an individual or a group possesses. Included in this set is the right for an individual or group to voluntarily relinquish any or all of those rights. Obviously, problems arise when two parties have conflicting rights.
Duty - the set of obligations that an individual or a group possesses. Major problems arise when duties are considered independently from the consequences of those duties.

The following concepts involve methods to balance the three ethical lodes above.

Utilitarianism - an ethical decision is best when it creates the most net good, either by maximizing benefit, minimizing cost, or a combination of the two. This combination can be measured in two ways: 1) each person represents one unit, and the best decision is the one that makes the most people happy, or 2) each person can incur various degrees of benefit/cost, and the best decisions is the one that takes into account those variations.

For example, say a home is in a prime location for an airport. The former method would measure a cost to four people (the family) against the benefit to thousands of people (the local economy). Simple decision. However, the latter method would measure the cost to that family (loss of a home and jobs, or worse depending on the government) against the boost to the economy. The decision is a bit harder to make now.

Consequentialism - an ethical decision is best when it creates the best possible outcome. (Ends over means)
Pragmatism - an ethical decision is best when the practicality and utility of the decision is considered alongside the outcome. (NOT means over ends; rather, means = ends)

Objectivism - the validity of an ethical decision is independent of individual attitudes.

Subjectivism - the validity of an ethical decision can only be interpreted through the attitudes of individuals.

Pluralism - various ethical statements can be equal in truth and correctiveness; even if they stand in contrast to each other.

Now, all these concepts are well and good in theory. But what we are interested in for our topics is how these concepts are utilized to make applicable decisions in the real world. And in our Model UN world, we have the additional complicating factor of cultural differences. This leads to cultural relativism, or the argument that different cultures place different values on certain societal aspects. Cultural relativism stands in marked contrast to universalism, or the concept that one set of ethical or moral principals can be applied to all cultures equally. One example of this difference is the debate over educating children. In Western thought, it is moral and ethical to provide education to all children under a certain age. In other cultures, however, it is immoral and inethical to make this decision without consulting the family, which may need the child to help bring in income. The issues you will encounter in our committee will force you to take special care in understanding these cultural differences.

Lastly, we need to summarize the thought process that many policy makers actually use to make tough ethical decisions.

- The Four A’s -

1. Acquire Facts

2. Alternatives

3. Assess

4. Act

  By acquiring facts, determining which alternatives exist, assessing the validity and feasibility of the alternatives, and acting, governmental bodies and review boards can ensure that major ethical lapses don’t occur and a decision can actually bee made. This, however, won’t be your task for the 56th session. Your task is to determine what type of institution is the best for making these decisions. Make sure, however, that when you go about researching what institution is best for your nation, you keep in mind the above concept, for they will be central to our discussion.

Sometime within the next few days, we will be posting a sample ethical issue, and we will leave it open to you to practice the above modes of thought by providing your opinions on the issue.

-Bryan, signing off.

Attached are the guidelines and rubric for Position Papers from last year’s session. As of right now, these will remain the same for this year, but we will update you if they are different. We will follow this format closely, and encourage you to do so as well.

Position Paper Guidelines

For help in finding research sources, feel free to use the sources that can be found in the topic synopsis. We included several additional readings that you may find interesting as well. You should also regularly browse The American Journal of Bioethics, The President’s Council on Bioethics, and the Union of Concerned Scientists for valuable news and material for your research. However, be wary of partiality that you will find in the latter two. The President’s Council has been accused of dismissing members for disagreeing with the Bush Administration’s policy (which incidentally makes the Council a VERY good source for the delegate representing the United States). The UCS, on the other hand, has been accused of being radically left-wing and of sensationalizing issues. Essentially, if you use one, try to use the other as well to balance things out.

The International Bioethics Committee is a subdivision of UNESCO created to deal with questions of bioethics. It is a strong starting point for the work the UN has done in this field. In addition, you can easily find comparable bioethics advisory councils and journals in the nation you are representing by using an extensive Google search. We provided the American sources above simply because most of the discourse has been focused in the United States, but that does not mean that there aren’t more engaging and illuminating discussions elsewhere. For example, here are links to the Italian National Bioethics Committee and the Second National Bioethics Conference in India.

Lastly, BMUN has a VERY strict plagarism policy regarding position papers. Our official policy is that any paper that is caught using material without citations will be disqualified from a research paper, and that any school with more than four cases of plagarism will be disqualified from a delegation award. We will take this a step further in out committee. Any delegate that has been caught plagarizing will be disqualified from ANY award, both research and in-committee. We hate to be such downers, but, it is simply not worth it, both for you and your fellow delegates.

- Bryan

Article link.

By CHRISTOPHER BODEEN and ALAN SCHER ZAGIER – 2 days ago

BEIJING (AP) — They’re paralyzed from diving accidents and car crashes, disabled by Parkinson’s, or blind. With few options available at home in America, they search the Internet for experimental treatments — and often land on Web sites promoting stem cell treatments in China.

They mortgage their houses and their hometowns hold fundraisers as they scrape together the tens of thousands of dollars needed for travel and the hope for a miracle cure.

A number of these medical tourists claim some success when they return home:

Jim Savage, a Houston man with paralysis from a spinal cord injury, says he can move his right arm. Penny Thomas of Hawaii says her Parkinson’s tremors are mostly gone. The parents of 6-year-old Rylea Barlett of Missouri, born with an optical defect, say she can see.

But documentation is mostly lacking, and Western doctors warn that patients are serving as guinea pigs in a country that isn’t doing the rigorous lab and human tests that are needed to prove a treatment is safe and effective…

This article points to various differing schools of thought concerning China’s stem-cell policy. These viewpoints have nothing to do with the sanctity of life or other issues that dominate American discourse; rather, the debate is centered on the need for scientific research to progress and the need for regulation of said research. These two concepts need not be mutually exclusive, although, in the international scientific community, it often turns out that way.

-Bryan

Just for clarification…

#1: Genetics and Cultural Identity
#2: Biomedical Research Ethics Standards

-Bryan

Hey everyone,

Welcome to the official blog for the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization! To make things easier for everyone involved, we will refer to the committee simply as UNESCO.

This post will be the first in a long line of posts that will hopefully prepare not just you, but also your advisors and ourselves as well for the committee, and for the 56th Annual Session. This post will serve simply as an Introduction to this blog, and to its organization.

Each week leading up to the conference, there will be one main post covering a major section of the broad field of bioethics and how science and society intermingle with the international community. Hopefully, these posts will help each of you gain a better understanding of what issues are involved, and prepare you for a dynamic debate.

The schedule for the main posts are as follows

Week of 12/31: Introduction
Week of 1/7: Morality, Ethics, and Culture
Week of 1/14: Science and Ethics
Week of 1/21: International Law
Weeks of 1/28 to 2/25: Bioethics Case Studies
Week of 3/3: Major Questions
Week of 3/10: Answers to Questions, Lead-up to the Conference

In addition, there will be other posts that will talk about major news events and topic updates. These posts can be found in the pages to the right. Also on the right, you can find several links that will be of great assistance to your research and just general academic curiosity. Most of these sources are not absolutely essential, except for the Topic Synopsis, which will serve as merely the initial backbone of debate.

I’ve also attached Guidelines for your position papers. More information on our expectations for your papers can be found inside. What we are looking for is quality, not how many pages you can write. However, we don’t want a paper so short that is excludes important information either.

And for the last of the serious stuff, the topics will deal with issues that are complex and don’t readily appear as if they have a solution. We won’t expect you to be able to grasp each issue completely; we just want an intermediate level of understanding. To accomplish this, think about these essential questions. For the first topic (Genetics and Cultural Identity), how can the international system balance the protection of the identity of minorities threatened by genetic diversity research and the freedom of that research? Which priority is more important for your nation, considering ethnic and cultural issues in your nation? For the second topic (Medical Research and Health Standards), how should the international system regulate medical trials and pharmceutical companies that operate internationally? Should each case be dealt with by review boards in each nation, or should an international oversight organization handle these issues?

These are simplistic questions, but starting to think about these questions early will help you grasp these difficult concepts before we get more specific. Read the topic synopsis to increase your early understanding, and don’t be afraid to ask for clarifications.

Lastly, time to introduce your chairs! Patrick Ho is a first year at both Cal and in BMUN, and has yet to decide on a major. He is interested in music, tennis, eating, and meeting new people. Margarita is a fourth year at both Cal and in BMUN, and is a Molecular and Cell Biology major. She loves guinea pigs, math, and Oski (obviously a big Cal fan). As for me, I am, along with Margarita, a fourth year at Cal and in BMUN (go seniors!), and am also a Molecular and Cell Biology major, doubling with Legal Studies. I’m interested in running and other athletic activities (go Lakers, Dodgers, and the Golden Bears), House M.D. and The Office, and of course snowboarding.

If you want to contact us for ANY reason (questions about the committee, conference, or MUN in general; or anything else!) don’t be shy and feel free to do so. Our emails are as follows.

Bryan: bryanjsu AT gmail.com
Margarita: mivanova86 AT berkeley.edu
Patrick: patrickho AT berkeley.edu

We hope that UNESCO is ultimately a exciting and rewarding experience, and we hope to hear from you all soon!

- Bryan