“Ethics and social policy in research on the neuroscience of human sexuality”

Nature Neuroscience 7, 1031 – 1033 (2004)
doi:10.1038/nn1324
Paul Root Wolpe is in the Department of Psychiatry and Center for Bioethics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104, USA

“The potential benefits of neuroscientific research into sexuality are great, but neuroscientists must participate in debates over the social, forensic and therapeutic implications of their findings. If serious research in sexuality is to be supported by the public, researchers must continue to earn society’s trust with responsible and thoughtful presentation of their work.”
http://www.nature.com/neuro/journal/v7/n10/full/nn1324.html

“Introduction to the special section on social neuroscience: promise and caveats.”
Harmon-Jones E, Devine PG-Pub Med
Abstract

“This special issue of the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology: Attitudes and Social Cognition is devoted to theory and research at the interface of social psychology and neuroscience. The 5 empirical articles represent the theoretical and methodological breadth of issues considered by social neuroscientists. The methods span brain lesion work to neuroendocrinology to psychophysiological indicators of brain activity to functional magnetic resonance imaging indicators of brain activity. The remaining 2 articles consider explicitly some of the promises and pitfalls of social neuroscience; these authors, although noting the power of neuroscience methods, remind readers of the serious challenges posed in trying to examine the biological processes underlying or associated with social psychological phenomena. These articles help to reveal the richness of social neuroscience and the power of neuroscientific methods to address processes and mechanisms that would not be possible with traditional social psychology methods.”
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14561113?dopt=Abstract&holding=npg

*Health IT (HIT) and Electronic Health Records-might be affected by lapses in ethics (“sloppy and paste”etc.)
-uncertian tech?
-regulation?
Use of tech in relation to DSM-5,uncertian paradigm(s)

What of the test subjects?

The countvailing force to poor ethics is leagal Kung Fu in the courtroom with a Grand Jury.

Lab animals gone bad: The Surly Karate Monkey logo:

(from cycle-yoshida)

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s