“American Anthropological Assossiation-Ethics Task Force”
note commentary

“Buyology Phrenology?”

“Do you do Voodoo?”

“Human Research Committe Handbook for Investigators”

“Regulating the research enterprise: international norms and the right to bodily integrity in human subject research”
“ABSTRACT: This article analyzes international law claims in human subject litigation, arguing that the failure of federal courts or Congress to oversee this kind of litigation by providing or recognizing a federal cause of action for research torts is an injustice. It is about two distinct and somewhat arcane areas of the law, international law and the law of human subjects research. Because they draw on different historical, social and conceptual frameworks, each has its own descriptive section in the article. In the first section, the author briefly describes international law and its place in the U.S. constitutional order. This section explains why international law claims are routinely rejected by the courts. In the second section, the author discusses the moral underpinnings of the research enterprise and explains how the values of science contradict the values of human rights and medicine.”

Cheers study

“When human experimentation is criminal.

An unacknowledged problem exists in the realm of human subject experimentation: criminal acts are being committed seemingly without consequence. The individuals escaping punishment are no ordinary individuals; rather, they are medical researchers whose exalted social status combined with the social benefits of their research appear to immunize them from punishment”
*check for authors, contributors ref, interesting

“Jackson Signs Proposed Rule Amending Human Subjects Protections Rule

On January 18, 2011, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lisa Jackson signed a proposed rule that would revise EPA’s February 6, 2006, final rule concerning protections for subjects in human research. According to EPA, the proposed amendments would broaden the applicability of the rules to cover human testing with pesticides submitted to EPA under any regulatory statute it administers. The proposed amendments would also disallow participation in third-party pesticide studies by subjects who cannot consent for themselves. Finally, the proposed amendments would identify specific considerations to be addressed in EPA science and ethics reviews of proposed and completed human research with pesticides, drawn from the recommendations of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS). The pre-publication version of the proposed rule, which EPA expects to publish in early February 2011, is available online. Comments will be due 60 days after EPA publishes the proposed rule in the Federal Register.”

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s