UNESCO

Article link.By AMY HARMON

Published: February 24, 2008

 

Victoria Grove wanted to find out if she was destined to develop the form of emphysema that ran in her family, but she did not want to ask her doctor for the DNA test that would tell her.

She worried that she might not be able to get health insurance, or even a job, if a genetic predisposition showed up in her medical records, especially since treatment for the condition, alpha-1 antitrypsin deficiency, could cost over $100,000 a year. Instead, Ms. Grove sought out a service that sent a test kit to her home and returned the results directly to her…

Again, if you cannot access the article, let me know and I will email the full text to you.

Also, a great archive of articles on the same topic. Granted, these are all issues that exist in the US. Still, its a great resource, especially when you extend those same issues to the international arena and apply cultural relativism to the debate.

- Bryan

Hey everyone,

Again, I have to apologize for my haphazard breaks from blogging. Life for a college student is very busy, and I hope you understand.

That being said, its less than three weeks until the conference, and I hope you guys are getting as excited as I am, especially seeing some of the submissions of articles that I’ve been getting.

First of all, I promised you guys an overview of international law, both in principle and in practice. Convienently, I was the head chair of the 6th Legal committee of the General Assembly for last year’s session, and I provided a succinct overview of international law in that committee’s topic synopsis. It was brief considering that international law is a very nebulous and arbitrary process, and hard to understand, even for people like me. Last year’s delegates only needed a minimal level of understanding, and I cannot see you guys needing to know more than they did…

6th Legal topic synopsis from the 55th Annual Session

Finally, two delegates have submitted very interesting articles…

Article link

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - People indigenous to Siberia have strong genetic links to native peoples in the Americas, according to a study further supporting the theory that humans first entered the Americas over a land bridge across the Bering Strait.

Scientists at Stanford University in California combed through the genes of 938 people from 51 places, looking at 650,000 DNA locations in each person…

This article is quite revealing in the fact that we can discover people’s common ancestry in a peaceful way and let science be a main priority. With this way of discovering the past and DNA of indigenous people, we can ensure the safety of indigenous people and also let science discover the links between various ethnic groups. Also, by discovering the differences between people’s places of origins, we can stop the flow of prejudice by disproving that a certain ethnic groups committed crimes against another group. This would be one of the more positive side effects of genetic tracking. Hopefully, countries will see the positive effects of genetic tracking and will be more inclined to support scientists, but will also hopefully join together to combat any negative side effects that may arise.

Article link

The normal “standard of care” against which new interventions are tested in medical research has not been formally defined. It is usually taken to mean the “best proved treatment” for any condition under investigation in a trial. We reject the arbitrariness of this notion of the standard of care and offer a more comprehensive alternative. Use of this new standard invokes a new approach to international research ethics that focuses on reducing inequalities in global health…

If you guys cannot access the second article, let me know, and I will email the full text to you. I have access through the University of California proxy server, so I’m not sure how the restrict access to the general public.

Later this week I will start posting some intriguing case studies for you all to look over. So, until then, good luck with continuing your awesome researching!

- Bryan

Q: The position paper guidelines you link to here are different than the guidelines in the Delegate Guide. Which do I follow?

A: Follow the guidelines in this blog, as they are more comprehensive than the guidelines in the Delegate Guide.

- Bryan

A delegate emailed this article to the chairs about a very interesting and pertinent article concerning the first topic. I’m getting very encouraged by some of the more exemplary examples of researching shown by some of you. Keep up the great work!

Article link.

ScienceDaily (Jan. 23, 2008 ) — The origins and current genetic relationships of Pacific Islanders have generated interest and controversy for many decades. Now, a new comprehensive genetic study of almost 1,000 individuals has revealed that Polynesians and Micronesians have almost no genetic relation to Melanesians, and that groups that live in the islands of Melanesia are remarkably diverse…

This article is a prime example of how genome identification on indigenous people can be used. While the discovery stated in this article may not lead to any harmful effects later on, the problem still arises of what may happen when two races are found to be identical. A hate relationship may develop as one side refuses to acknowledge the other. Bitterness may brew between two different groups and prejudice could spread. Genetic identification is an issue of varying opinions that need to see the problems from all sides of the spectrum and determine the route that will allow science to prevail but danger to dissipate.

- Bryan

Article link.By Will Dunham Tue Feb 12, 4:47 PM ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Only about a third of U.S. medical schools have policies aimed at curbing conflicts of interest arising from their financial ties with companies like drug and medical device makers, researchers said on Tuesday.

Such businesses cultivate deep financial relationships with medical schools. Among other things, industry often relies on academic researchers to conduct studies that may help win government approval for drugs that could generate billions of dollars in sales.

The researchers asked 125 U.S. medical schools about their policies governing financial ties with industry. Eighty-six schools responded to the 2006 survey.

Only 38 percent had adopted a policy covering financial interests held by the institution. Thirty-seven percent were working on adopting such a policy, and the final 25 percent were doing nothing…

This article touches on two issues that are important for us. One, this should remind you about the ethical issue of conflicts of interest I talked about in my last post. Businesses want profits, and that could and often does interfere with proper health care. Two, the coordination of business and medical research is the main impetus for spreading research past national borders, which leads to the very problem of a lack of an international standard for research ethics that will dominate our second topic.

- Bryan

Given that the field of ethics in antiquity was derived from religion and philosophy, which are both essentially quests for truth, it is no surprise that ethics has moved into the modern era’s quest for truth, or science. It should also be no surprise that, for better or worse, the practitioners of science has also tried to resist that very spread of ethics into their field much in the same way priests did centuries ago.

As I’ve have tried to expound in the past, our topics aren’t so much concerned with the ethical dilemmas of the principles of science (ex: whether we should allow human cloning) but rather the ethical issues involved with the practice of science and research. For example, our Genetics and Cultural Identity topic deals with how to or should we protect minorities from the potential harms of genetic diversity mapping, not should we map human diversity. Our Research Standards topic will deal with how to reconcile the various ethics review board systems in place to create a strong international review system, not should we conduct research. Therefore, this post will mostly deal with the problems that can be uncovered when scientists and society have differing priorities.

(Just a side note: I’ve begun to read many of your papers that were turned in before the 2/1 deadline, and I’ve noticed that some of you seem to have missed the point I just made. I won’t dock points, as the issues are tough, but do be sure to realign your research for the conference.)

One area of great ethical concern is misconduct in research. When a research team uncovers a potentially groundbreaking discovery, the motivations for publication and consequently fame and additional funding are great. Often times however, those motivations are too great, especially when researchers are convinced of their discovery despite anomalies in data, procedural errors, or a demand for more conclusive tests. In extraordinary cases, senior researchers have in the past coerced junior researchers to assist in coverups, and junior researchers in turn have neglected to inform authorities (whistleblowing) in hopes of advancement.

Researchers have also at times fabricated data in what is known as the “publish or perish” phenomenon. The scientific world moves at such a fast pace that the fear is that if you don’t publish, someone else will and steal your glory. In addition, conflicts of interest are common in science, especially now since corporations and industry often work closely with universities, blurring the line between the public and private sectors.

Research is just one area in science that can be clouded with ethical issues, and I’ve chosen to focus on research simply because our second topic is dominated by it. Use this post to start thinking about how the ethical methodologies I laid out in the previous post can be used to analyze ethical issues in science, and as always, if you have any questions, feel free to leave a comment or email any of us.

-Bryan

Article link.

The CEO of Geron is planning embryonic stem cell tests in humans this spring if the biotech meets the FDA’s “high bar.” 

By Aaron Smith, CNNMoney.com staff writer

February 11 2008: 3:16 PM EST 

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) — The first experiments using human embryonic stem cells in human subjects could begin within a few months, the chief executive of biotech Geron said Monday.

At the annual BIO CEO conference in New York, Dr. Thomas Okarma said Geron plans to start embryonic stem-cell studies in humans with spinal cord injuries toward the end of the second quarter. Okarma said the tests would involve up to 40 human patients, while all prior tests involved rats…

Keep in mind while reading this article to try to stray from focusing on the typical stem cell debate in the United States (sanctity of life, need for medical cures, embryonic vs. adult stem cell lines) and focus more on how the research itself is regulated and approved, as the third-party management of research is to be the focus of our second topic.

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.