“n a 1966 paper noted anesthesiologist Henry K. Beecher described 22 published medical studies where patients had been experimented on with no expected benefit to the patient. In one study, for example, patients infused with live cancer cells had been told they were receiving “some cells” without specifying that they were cancer. Though identities of the authors and institutions had been stripped, the 22 studies were later identified as having been conducted by mainstream researchers and published in prestigious journals within approximately the previous decade. The 22 cases had been selected from a set of 50 that Beecher had collected, and he presented evidence that studies he considered unethical were even more widespread and represented a systemic problem in medical research rather than exceptions. Though Beecher had been writing about human experimentation and publicizing cases that he considered to be bad practice for nearly a decade, it was a 1965 briefing to science writers and the 1966 paper that finally earned widespread news coverage and stimulated public reaction. The paper has been described as “the most influential single paper ever written about experimentation involving human subjects.” The Office for Human Research Protections credits this paper as “ultimately contributing to the impetus for the first NIH and FDA regulations.”
In addition to documenting the extent of problems in human subject research, Beecher was instrumental in formulating the solutions. One common aspect to many of Beecher’s cases was that some experimental subjects, such as military personnel and mentally handicapped children in institutions, were not in a position to freely decline consent. Beecher believed that rules requiring informed consent were not by themselves sufficient, as truly informed consent was an unattainable ideal. He worked both in defining the rules and conditions for informed consent and in establishing institutional review boards as an additional layer of oversight regarding research protocols.”
Henry Beecher 1966 New England Journal of Medicine article “Ethics and Clinical Research”
found under related resorces PDF
So with the sage wisdem of an IRB we can magically transmute an unethical experiment into a ethical experiment and keep our day jobs.
“Consultants, carrying laurel branches sacred to Apollo, approached the temple along the winding upward course of the Sacred Way, bringing an animal for sacrifice in the forecourt of the temple, and a monetary fee. Petitioners drew lots to determine the order of admission, but representatives of a city-state or those who brought larger donations to Apollo were secured a higher place in line. The sacrificial animal, often a goat as representation of the site’s discovery, was first showered with water and observed to ensure that it shivered from the hooves upward, an auspicious sign that the oracular reading could proceed. Upon sacrifice, the animal’s organs, particularly its liver, were examined to ensure the signs were favorable.”
The experience of supplicants
“It would appear that the supplicant to the oracle would undergo a four-stage process, typical of shamanic journeys.
* Step 1: Journey to Delphi — Supplicants were motivated by some need to undertake the long and sometimes arduous journey to come to Delphi in order to consult the oracle. This journey was motivated by an awareness of the existence of the oracle, the growing motivation on the part of the individual or group to undertake the journey, and the gathering of information about the oracle as providing answers to important questions.
* Step 2: Preparation of the Supplicant — Supplicants were interviewed in preparation of their presentation to the Oracle, by the priests in attendance. The genuine cases were sorted and the supplicant had to go through rituals involving the framing of their questions, the presentation of gifts to the Oracle and a procession along the Sacred Way carrying laurel leaves to visit the temple, symbolic of the journey they had made.
* Step 3: Visit to the Oracle — The supplicant would then be led into the temple to visit the adyton, put his question to the Pythia, receive his answer and depart. The degree of preparation already undergone would mean that the supplicant was already in a very aroused and meditative state, similar to the shamanic journey elaborated on in the article.
* Step 4: Return Home — Oracles were meant to give advice to shape future action, that was meant to be implemented by the supplicant, or by those that had sponsored the supplicant to visit the Oracle. The validity of the Oracular utterance was confirmed by the consequences of the application of the oracle to the lives of those people who sought Oracular guidance”
“Wish fulfillment is the satisfaction of a desire through an involuntary thought process. Wish fulfillment can occur in dreams or in daydreams, in the symptoms of neurosis, or in the hallucinations of psychosis. This satisfaction is often indirect and requires interpretation to recognize.
Sigmund Freud coined the term (wunscherfüllung) in 1899 in an early text titled The Interpretation of Dreams.
Wikisource has Freud’s original book about wish fulfillment:
The Interpretation of Dreams
According to Freud, wish fulfillment occurs when Unconscious desires are repressed by the Ego and Superego. This repression often stems from guilt and taboos imposed by society. Dreams are attempts by the Unconscious to resolve some repressed conflict.”
“As an ethical IRB we don’t feel that rejecting the research protocal “hamberger” in any way constitutes a conflict of intrest”