sign in sign up
<<
Home , Gerald Schatten, Michael Behe, Michael Ruse, New Scientist

...... Professional Ethics Report Publication of the American Association for the Advancement of , Scientific Freedom, Responsibility & Law Program in collaboration with the Committee on Scientific Freedom & Responsibility, Professional Society Ethics Group

VOLUME XIX NUMBER 1 Winter 2006

Dr. Jason Borenstein science. to encourage the courts, legislators, and A legal ruling such as this could school boards to participate in an age- The author is a visiting Assistant generate a precedent that keeps “design” old, and perhaps intractable, philosophi- Professor in the School of Public Policy out of science classes in other school cal debate concerning whether there is a at Georgia Tech and the Editor of the districts (as opposed to what might occur firm and decisive dividing line between Journal of Philosophy, Science & Law if local school boards decide the matter). science and religion.[6] When these (www.psljournal.com). Yet it is not clear that the arguments groups rekindle arguments about supporting design theory should be whether a set of criteria exists that : Religious Concerns labeled as being religious in . distinguishes science from other fields of Aside, It Is Still Troubling inquiry, it may generate more problems There is a strong temptation to say than it solves. Scholars disagree, for From and Ohio to that the teaching of Intelligent Design example, about whether [7] Kansas and Utah, battles wage on during violates the Establishment Clause consid- or Larry Laudan[8] has put forward the school board meetings and legislative ering the underlying religious motives of superior view concerning the decision in sessions concerning how public schools its supporters. The agenda of design McLean v. Arkansas.[9] should handle the topic of . theorists may, and often does, coincide Intelligent Design theory is a relatively with the goals of religious organizations, On a related note, assuming that the new participant in these debates, and as a but that alone might not be sufficient to problem of demarcation can be solved result, it was not known, until recently, prove that their arguments are unscientific. and that the relevant criteria have been how the courts would respond to it. It would be overly hasty and uncharitable accurately identified, we can certainly Whereas challenges to evolution have to assume that merely because someone is question whether non-scientists such as typically been dismissed on constitu- religious, that she cannot genuinely be judges and public officials will be able to tional grounds, Intelligent Design was interested in promoting good science. apply the criteria properly and consis- articulated in a cautious and deliberate Further, in principle, one does not neces- tently. The strategy of labeling Intelli- manner so that it might successfully sarily have to be a theist to be swayed by gent Design as being religion might be withstand legal scrutiny. Although the ’s “” fraught with problems, but there are notion that an intelligent being created argument,[2] William Dembski’s argument compelling reasons why we should be life is far from new, recent advocates of concerning statistical improbabilities,[3] or wary of the view. For one, design design theory have tried to incorporate Stephen Meyer’s argument about the theorists explicitly refuse to shed light scientific concepts and terminology in a “Cambrian explosion.”[4] There is suitable on the nature and identity of the more sophisticated fashion than their justification for claiming that these “designer.” It is rather suspicious that predecessors did. arguments have their share of flaws, which scholars, who allegedly offer a theory is one reason why the scientific commu- that is scientific in nature, acknowledge Historically, the legal system nity has largely rejected them. Yet a that there are significant components of endeavored to determine whether primary and essential way of revealing their theory for which they will not alternatives to evolution should be these flaws is through examining the provide an explanation. This is an characterized as science or as religion, a empirical evidence. especially troubling practice since it strategy commonly used to handle cases appears to be done to accomplish a Placing the arguments of design involving . After weighing the predetermined legal goal, the acceptance theorists within the domain of religion can merits of Intelligent Design, a federal of design in classrooms, rather sidetrack the dispute from the crucial issue, judge, John E. Jones III, held that it is not than for purely scientific reasons. science and thus should be barred from which is whether any of the claims being offered have supporting evidence behind science classrooms in the Dover Pennsyl- Within their writings, design them. Many of the key arguments for vania school district.[1] It is understand- theorists primarily focus their attention design can be challenged, and perhaps able why Judge Jones’s decision has on delineating alleged shortcomings already have been refuted, on scientific been praised as being a victory for contained within evolutionary theory. grounds.[5] Further, it is probably unwise Winter 2006 Professional Ethics Report 1 ...... (Borenstein continued from page 1) Santorum from Pennsylvania, play a key human life began and their view is a Although critiques can be useful, design role in pushing forward various different “rival,” in some sense of the term, to theory falls short of providing a coherent kinds of initiatives that “encourage” evolution. However, merely because a set of positive claims about how the teachers to criticize evolution, and these group of people espouse a view and world works. Scientists rightly complain individuals are not typically scientists. sincerely believe it, that is not sufficient that Intelligent Design offers little or no to show it belongs in a science classroom. direction for future research avenues. For Design supporters are quick to attack A hypothesis must prove its mettle by example, what kind of experiment could be flaws that they detect in evolution, which withstanding the scrutiny of the scientific constructed to determine how the leads them to endorse the “teach the community, and design theorists them- designer created biological mechanisms controversy” approach.[10] Although the selves seem to acknowledge, albeit such as blood clotting? There is plausibil- design movement operates under the grudgingly,[13] that their theory has not ity behind the cynic’s suggestion that guise of promoting good pedagogy, it is passed this demanding test. design theory may just amount to a unclear how this goal is being accom- complex series of arguments from plished if political mandates, such as the [1] “Court rejects ‘intelligent design’ in science class,” Cnn.com, December 23, 2005, at http:// ignorance, honing in on both real and one that was temporarily enforced in supposed gaps in our knowledge about www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/12/20/ Dover, and parental pressure are interfer- intelligent.design.ap/ (last visited January 16, the world. It does not advance our ing with how biology teachers run their 2006). understanding beyond informing us that own classrooms. Evolution is such a [2] Michael J. Behe, “Irreducible Complexity: Obstacle to Darwinian Evolution,” in Dembski scientists have not fully solved all of the politically-charged issue that it causes key questions for which we seek answers. and Ruse (eds.), Debating Design: From Darwin some biology teachers to present a to DNA, Cambridge University Press, 2004, pp. caricature of the topic or avoid it alto- 352-370. There is also reason to be skeptical gether in order to avoid the wrath of [3] William Dembski, et. al., The Design Inference: Eliminating Chance through Small about design theory because of the parents, politicians, and school board frequency with which supporters of Probabilities, Cambridge University Press, officials.[11] Arguably, the goal of 2006. design make use of non-scientific teaching students good science is not [4] Stephen C. Meyer, “The origin of biological avenues to gain support for their view. being upheld if our philosophical and information and the higher taxonomic categories,” Proceedings of the Biological The mainstream is religious disagreements interfere with the not clamoring for the modification of Society of Washington, Vol. 117(2), 2004, pp. ability of teachers to discuss a topic they 213-239. evolution education so that it becomes know is central to the biology curriculum. [5] For example, Francisco Ayala seeks to more “ID-friendly.” Rather, momentum The work of scientists instead of political explain how evolutionary theory undermines an appeal to a “designer” and to teleological behind the attempt to gain acceptance for rhetoric should determine which scientific design is generated, for example, from explanations for natural processes in “Design theories are presented in the biology without Designer: Darwin’s Greatest Discovery,” government officials who are sympathetic classroom. from Debating Design: From Darwin to DNA, to it. Politicians, such as Senator Rick edited by William A. Dembski and Michael Ruse, Cambridge University Press, 2004, pp. 55-80. Editor: Mark S. Frankel As a by-product of the seemingly [6] A point of contention, for example, between Deputy Editor: Azurii K. Collier endless public debates about evolution, scholars such as Stephen J. Gould and Richard Contributing Authors: Deborah Runkle, too many students end up learning a Dawkins. Enita A. Williams diluted version of evolution.[12] Hence, [7] Michael Ruse, “Pro Judice,” Science, Technology, & Human Values, Vol. 7, 1982, even if it was granted that genuine Professional Ethics Report pp.19-23. The is published scientific rivals to evolution exist, which quarterly by the Scientific Freedom, Re- [8] Larry Laudan, “Science at the Bar—Causes for Concern,” Science, Technology, & Human sponsibility and Law Program in collabora- is a huge assumption, there would not be much value in presenting “alternatives to Values, Vol. 7, 1982, pp.16-19. tion with the Committee on Scientific Free- [9] 529 F. Supp. 1255 (1982). dom and Responsibility and the Profes- evolution.” Unless students are accu- [10] Stephen C. Meyer, “Teach the Contro- sional Society Ethics Group, American As- rately and sincerely being taught what versy,” Cincinnati Enquirer, March 30, 2002, at sociation for the Advancement of Science, evolution entails, they may just end up http://www.arn.org/docs/meyer/ 1200 New York Avenue, NW, Washington, criticizing a straw man. Moreover, in sm_teachthecontroversy.htm (last visited January 8, 2006). DC 20005, (202) 326-6606; Fax (202) 289- accordance with the logic behind 4950; E-mail: [email protected]; WWW [11] C. Dean, “Evolution Takes a Back Seat in teaching students about disagreements U.S. Classes,” , February 1, http://www.aaas.org/spp/dspp/sfrl/sfrl.htm. relating to what people believe about the 2005. Back issues of Professional Ethics Report origin of human life, evolution and design [12] L.S. Lerner, “Good and Bad Science in US are now on-line at http://www.aaas.org/spp/ Schools,” Nature 407: 287-290, September 21, dspp/sfrl/per/per.htm are not the only two competing options 2000. that could be taught. The Raelians have [13] From their own words, design supporters This newsletter may be reproduced articulated a theory concerning how John Campbell and Stephen Meyer suggest that without permission as long as “Because intelligent design is a new theory, we, Letters to the Editor: The editors welcome like Kansas’ board, don’t think students should proper acknowledgement is given. comments from our readers. We reserve the be required to learn it.” ISSN: 1045-8808 right to edit and abridge letter as space per- mits. Please address all correspondence to the deputy editor. (Borenstein continued on page 3)

Winter 2006 Professional Ethics Report 2 ...... (Borenstein continued from page 3) RIGOR, RESPECT AND Respect for life, the law and the public and Stephen C. Meyer, “Evolution: Debate it,” RESPONSIBILITY: A UNIVERSAL good USATODAY.com, August 14, 2005, at http:// 1. Ensure that your work is lawful and www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/ ETHICAL CODE FOR SCIENTISTS 2005-08-14-evolution-debate_x.htm (last justified. visited January 16, 2006). In 2004, at a meeting of science 2. Minimize and justify any adverse effect ministers and advisors from the G8 your work may have on people, animals IN THE NEWS (Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, and the natural environment. the United Kingdom, United States and Responsible communication: listening GENE DOPING ORACLES OFF ON Russia) Sir David King, the British Chief and informing PREDICTIONS, DOPING MAY Scientific Advisor organized a working 1. Seek to discuss the issues that science ARRIVE AT OLYMPICS NEAR YOU group to consider developing a universal raises for society. Listen to the aspira- ethical code of conduct for scientists. The tions and concerns of others. Gene doping oracles may need to group believed that such a code would be 2. Do not knowingly mislead, or allow clean off their crystal balls and reshuffle most useful if it would: others to be misled, about scientific their tarot cards in light of a trial under A. have an educational role, raising matters. Present and review scientific way in Germany. German coach, Thomas awareness among scientists and the evidence, theory or interpretation Springstein, has been accused of gene public; honestly and accurately. doping minors as far back as 2003, B. capture a small number of broad despite predictions from the scientific principles that are shared across According to a January 10, 2006 and athletic community that gene doping disciplinary and institutional bound edition of The Scientist, the code has “was not practiced and that it would not aries; been given a trial run among British become an actual threat before the 2008 C. be adopted voluntarily by indi government scientists who have been Beijing Olympics.” vidual scientists and scientific overwhelmingly positive about the code. Gene doping refers to uses of institutions. Supporters believe the code provides a genetic materials to enhance athletic A draft code was circulated throughout context for junior members to whistle- performance beyond an individual’s institutions in the G8 and the European blow if they see guidelines being broken. normal biological limits. Current biotech- Union. Recipients were asked to complete Critics say the code, because of its nology has the potential to quickly add a questionnaire regarding the perceived generality, does not offer real protection muscle mass, or extend endurance efficacy of the code and whether they to whistleblowers. Generality also makes through more efficient exchange oxygen. would consider adopting or using it in the code hard to enforce. The British While there are any number of chemicals their work. government officially launched the code and products that can create similar “Rigor, respect and responsibility: a during Britain’s National Science Week, results, many of these methods are easily universal ethical code for scientists” is a March 10-19. detected through simple blood or urine public statement of the values and tests. Gene doping has the potential to responsibilities of scientists. The aim of The Scientist “Scientists praise new UK bypass such detection methods by the code is to foster ethical research, to ethics code,” Stephen Pincock reprogramming the body’s own software encourage active reflection among January 10, 2006 *AKC and hardware. Detection problems are not scientists on the wider implications and impacts of their work, and to support the only concerns. There can be serious EPA ANNOUNCES NEW constructive communication between safety risks involved in any genetic SAFEGUARDS ON HUMAN scientists and the public on complex and manipulations, and the sports world is not STUDIES RESEARCH equiped to deal with them. challenging issues. Its provisions include the following: Springstein is being charged with a On January 26, 2006 the EPA an- number of doping related offenses based nounced that all third-party intentional Rigor, honesty and integrity in large part on email evidence found on dosing research on pesticides involving 1. Act with skill and care in all scientific his home computer. Evidence suggests children and pregnant women intended work. Maintain up to date skills and assist that he attempted to acquire Repoxygen, a for submission to EPA is banned. Third- their development in others. drug designed to increase oxygen party studies are not conducted or 2. Take steps to prevent corrupt practices exchange by increasing the red blood supported by a federal agency. EPA will and professional misconduct. Declare count. Whatever its outcome, the trial not conduct or support any intentional conflict of interest. sends a message that forecasts about the dosing studies involving pregnant 3. Be alert to the ways in which research progress of gene doping need to be women or children. These new rules also derives from and affects the work of other revisted. http://www.the-scientist.com/ include stringent ethical safeguards to people, and respect the rights and news/display/23101/ protect people who volunteer to partici- reputations of others. http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/ pate in third-party intentional dosing 0,2144,1890782,00.html *EAW ( News continued on page 4)

Winter 2006 Professional Ethics Report 3 ...... (News continued from page 3) consortium of 60 researchers, ethicists, research. Susan Hazen, acting assistant there are questions about whether the editors, and lawyers, administrator in EPA’s Office of Preven- donors are consenting that their released a consensus statement in January tion, Pesticides and Toxic Substances tissues be used in such a fashion, and 2006 on guidelines for ethical research on said, “Pregnant women and children whether researchers would have the human embryonic stem cells (HESC). The should never be involved in these types discretion to use the newly created message targets not only researchers, but of studies. Now adult volunteers will reproductive cells without consulting the all parties that play a role in developing have the highest ethical safeguards donor. Chimera pose another concern, ethical stem cell research practices. In available if they choose to participate in raising issues of human dignity and addition to calling upon various players in research studies.” natural order. The Hinxton Group argues this scientific enterprise to ensure legiti- With the implementation of these the scientific community is ill prepared to mate research, the Hinxton group pointed final regulations, the provisions of the handle these issues and needs to engage out two areas they see as looming issue in Federal Policy for the Protection of in a dialogue before research in these stem cell research – derived gametes and Human Subjects of Research, also areas is pursued further. chimeras. known as the Common Rule, will now Not everyone is enthusiastic about Scientists engaging in HESC research include all third-party intentional dosing the Hinxton Group’s findings. According are advised to treat stem cell and tissue th studies submitted to EPA. Additionally, to Laura Nelson’s February 27 article in donors as human subjects. The ‘human EPA is establishing a Human Studies The , several ethicists and subjects’ classification is well established Review Board to independently review scholars had some pointed criticisms in in the scientific community, and provides existing human studies and protocols for response to the Hinxton Group’s state- an implicit code of conduct for all parties. new studies. The final rule adopts ment. Lawyer Alta Charo from the Human subjects must provide documented regulations of the Department of Health at Berkeley, and ‘informed consent’, or recognition that and Human Services to provide addi- scientist Stephen Minger from King’s they knowingly accept the procedures they tional protections beyond those of the College in London, both expressed doubt are undertaking and have been warned of Common Rule to pregnant women and that some of the proposed guidelines any known possible adverse effects. and children in EPA observational would be adopted. Minger endorsed the Editors and journalists are urged to take a research and research not involving United Kingdom’s HESC regulations, more proactive role in verifying stem cell intentional exposure to any substance. many of which the Hinxton principles research prior to article publication. The initial draft of this first-ever rule mimic, but seemed less sure about the The Hinxton Group believes editors on human testing of pesticides drew principles’ mass appeal to the interna- are empowered to demand proof of review harsh criticism from public interest tional community. Charo pointed out that from an accredited ethical review board as groups, Congressmen and even scien- “some journals may be reluctant to be well as detailed descriptions of how co- tists. Critics say that ban leaves the door cast in the role of investigator rather than authors contributed to the manuscript. open for unethical conduct and serious peer reviewers” and less likely to engage Research funders should also play a larger liability problems. A spokesperson for in some of the suggested screening role in verifying that sponsored research the Natural Resources Defense Council procedures. The Hinxton Groups did not follows submitted protocols and is said the new rules may lead to more go far enough, according to Shahin Rafii, ethically sound according to national and pesticide testing on people because they a Cornell University geneticist. He international guidelines. Scientific societies will allow manufacturers to conduct believes the Hinxton Group should have are exhorted to engage in the ethical debate “observational tests” that monitor challenged governments with restrictive and assist in moving toward international individuals’ everyday exposure to toxic research regulations and pushed for consensus based on the Group’s state- chemicals. “public funds for science.” ment. Policy advisors and lawmakers are Approximately 50,000 Americans The Hinxton statement is available online counseled to create clear HESC research commented on the proposal over three at: http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/ legislation and ensure that laws are months. EPA typically received approxi- bioethics/finalsc.doc *AKC properly enforced. Finally, professionals mately 33 intentional dosing studies of involved in HESC research are advised to all types annually. With the implementa- pool resources to create websites with tion of this new rule, EPA expects the CONGRESSIONAL HEARING ASKS, HESC research data; ethical and legal number of systemic toxicity studies to “CAN SOUTH KOREA STEM CELL analysis; opportunities for international drop to 0-1 per year. FRAUD HAPPEN IN THE U.S.?” collaboration; and ‘international deposito- *AKC ries of stem cell lines’ for public use. In the March 7th hearing entitled The prospect of deriving sex cells from “Human and Embryonic Stem donor stem cells and creation of non- INTERNATIONAL PANEL ISSUES Cell Research after Seoul: Examining human/human hybrids (chimeras) raise STATEMENT ON STEM CELL exploitation, fraud and ethical problems in serious ethical questions for those ETHICS the research” before the Subcommittee involved in stem cell research. In the case of sex cell or gamete derivation, ( News continued on page 5) The Hinxton Group, an international

Winter 2006 Professional Ethics Report 4 ...... regulation. More attention to ethics (News continued from page 4) for research purposes’, and that law (most recently P.L. 109-149, Title V, during scientific training was suggested on Criminal Justice, Drug Policy, and Section 509) defines human to to deter scientists from engaging in Human Resources, subcommittee specifically include created by research misconduct. members asked expert panelists if the cloning.” South Korean stem cell scandal was the OHRP makes sure Institutional http://reform.house.gov/CJDPHR/ exception, or the first case of a likely Review Boards (IRBs) and other safe- Hearings/EventSingle.aspx?EventID series of frauds that prove the rule – stem guards are in place. He also noted that =40390 research requires special caution. under current guidance about human *EAW The hearing was divided into two embryonic stem cell (HESC) research, this witness panels. The first panel, and focus type of research does not generally fall of this report, consisted of officials from under the human subjects definition. The THE SILENT MAJORITY FIGHTS the Department of Health and Human last fact is of some note since a number of BACK Services and the National Institutes of groups (see section on the Hinxton Group Health. Panelists addressed concerns in this issue) have recently called for On February 25, 2006, approximately about the general frequency of fraud in HESC research and donation to be treated 800 demonstrators took to the streets at science, prevention measures currently in as human subjects to offer more protec- Oxford University. But this was not a place, and bureaucratic delays in agency tion. The Director of the Office of demonstration opposing war or bad replies to legislative inquiries. Research Integrity (ORI), Chris B. Pascal, cafeteria food. Rather, in an unprec- James F. Battey, Chair of the NIH explained how his office monitors edented development, the approximately Stem Cell Task Force, presented a institutions receiving federal research 800 student and faculty demonstrators breakdown of the three main points of funds. When research misconduct is stood up and spoke out in favor of fraud in the Korean stem cell scandal, as determined to have occurred, ORI reviews research using animals and against animal well as how the fraud was brought to an institution’s findings and then decides rights extremists. It was fitting that this light. Investigations into Hwang’s if it should investigate or affirm the demonstration took place in the UK, home research found there were never any institution’s findings. to the most radical elements of the animal somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT) stem In the question and answer segment, rights movement, many of whom have cells created, photos of SCNT cells were Chairman Mark Sounder (R-IN) was successfully exported their activities to fraudulent, and ethical violations in particularly interested in funding alloca- the United States. oocyte donation occurred. The fraud was tion for stem cell research. Battey In 2004, Oxford University aban- discovered when researchers from announced that in 2005, $40 million was doned plans to build a $33 million Hwang’s own lab came forward and allocated to stem cell research across 154 research facility that would expand the discredited the work. When asked if the projects. Grants ranged from the smallest university’s neurosciences program, fraud would have been uncovered had of $2000 to the largest of $4.2 million to including research using animals. Oxford Hwang’s lab assistants not come forward, start the National Stem Cell Bank. Dr. was forced to take this step when one of Battey responded that because science is Gerald Schatten of the University of the main building construction companies about reproducibility, even if lab members Pittsburgh and co-author of the discred- withdrew from the project after unremit- had not come forward, when scientists ited work in South Korea received $1.1 ting harassment, threats, and acts of could not reproduce Hwang’s results, the million in 2005 from NIH for his stem cell violence directed against it by animal research findings would have “fallen into research . When asked if Schatten was rights extremists. Dozens of violent disrepute.” When confronted with being investigated to determine his role, if attacks were perpetrated on the questions about the value of stem cell any, in the fraud, panelists warned that company’s offices and trucks, workers research in light of this fraud he replied, any investigation is confidential until a were threatened at the building site, and “While the stem cell research fraud in finding is made and did not mention any shareholders received threatening letters South Korea is unacceptable, it does not such findings against Dr. Schatten. telling them to sell their stock or see reflect on the potential of human embry- The subcommittee chair then turned personal information about themselves onic stem cell research one way or the the topic to internal research regulation. and their children posted on the internet. other.” In a past subcommittee hearing on drug Not surprisingly, the company’s stock Bernard Schwetz and Chris B. Pascal use in baseball, it was pointed out how dropped precipitously. Additionally, the testified to the procedural protections in difficult it is for an institution to regulate names and home addresses of Oxford place for research conducted under the itself when there are financial and scientists who conduct research with auspices of the HHS. Schwetz, Director of prestige incentives not to find evidence animals were posted on the internet. the Office for Human Research Protec- of misconduct. Battey responded that These actions of an extremist minority tions (OHRP), stated: current stem cell research law is a followed by only a few months Cambridge “The HHS is specifically prohibited by patchwork quilt of federal and state law. University’s decision to cancel construc- law from supporting ‘research in which a His department can only regulate tion of what would have been Europe’s human embryo or embryos are de- research done involving federal funds. largest facility, claiming that costs stroyed’, as well as from supporting ‘the State funding allocated for stem cell related to security made the project too creation of a human embryo or embryos research would lie beyond federal expensive. (News continued on page 6)

Winter 2006 Professional Ethics Report 5 ......

(News continued from page 5) outspoken members of Pro-Test, Profes- Clinical trial registration according to Unannounced, Oxford resumed sors Tipu Aziz, a consultant neurosur- ICMJE standards was another revision building in November 2005, a move that geon, and John Stein, a neurophysiolo- added to the guidelines. ICMJE standards delighted the research community and gist. Celebrity scientist Stephen Hawking also include a mandate that all “published infuriated the same extremist groups that also spoke out in favor of research with reports associated with the study” be had previously claimed victory in their animals, but the final word belongs to the made available to the public. chief executive of the UK’s Medical war against research using animals. In a Bias in clinical trial reports was a Research Council, Colin Blakemore – dramatic illustration that this was no significant concern to the AAMC. himself the target of animal rights ordinary construction site, over 100 Specifically, the use of data from selected extremists – who described the Pro-Test security experts were recruited to protect sites within a larger multi-site study movement as “extremely gratifying…The the workers, who wore masks to hide constitutes what the AAMC considers a people want this thuggery…off the their identities and who traveled to and high “potential for bias.” Instead, the streets of Oxford.” from the university in unmarked trucks in AAMC report suggests site-specific On a more discouraging note, the an attempt to hide the identity of the reports only be released after review by Oxford animal rights activists are now IN THE SOCIETIES contractor. the aforementioned Publication and heading for New York, where they plan to The workers took precautions for Analysis Committee, and “after the target clubs and restaurants hosting good reason. The web magazine Bite publication of the study as a whole.” reunion events arranged by the Oxford Back had posted messages from the “Ghost or guest authorship is Alumni Association of New York. But Animal Liberation Front (ALF), which unacceptable,” according to the new Laurie Pycroft will be rights on their heels, has been labeled a terrorist organization guidelines because it precludes disclo- with an invitation to speak in New York by the FBI, announcing “DO WHAT- sure of any relevant conflicts of interest and ambitions to go international. *DR EVER IT TAKES and blow these [exple- such as employment or consultancies. tive deleted] monsters off the face of the The new guidelines state that any such earth. We must target professors, IN THE SOCIETIES conflicts on the part of authors and teachers…students, investors, partners, investigators should be fully disclosed. supporters and ANYONE that dares to AAMC REVISED GUIDELINES FOR Published study reports should also deal in any part of the university CLINICAL TRIALS include a description of which portions of ...anything goes.” The website listed the the study are attributed to each author. names and addresses of 40 Oxford In January 2006, the Association of Finally, adequate funding must be faculty and staff members, saying they American Medical Colleges’ Executive allocated to cover publication costs were “legitimate targets,” and 100 Committee released a report entitled associated with the clinical trials to companies that donate to Oxford were Principles for Protecting Integrity in the ensure that information is made available threatened unless they sever ties with Conduct and Reporting of Clinical to the public. This calculation should be the university. Trials, which revised guidelines for included in initial grant proposals, and However, in an unlikely develop- appropriate supervision of sponsored publication must be completed even if a ment, the militants met their match in clinical trials, with particular attention to study is cancelled. Laurie Pycroft, a 16-year-old “bedroom industry sponsored trials. The new The report is available online at: http:// blogger,” who initiated a movement, Pro- guidelines call for timely publication of www.aamc.org/research/ Test, to support the construction of the results, , registration require- clinicaltrialsreporting/ long-postponed animal laboratory. ments, disclosure of authorship and clinicaltrialsreporting.pdf *EAW Although Pycroft has since received relevant conflicts of interest, and ad- death threats (“many badly written”), he equate funding for publication. says, “It’s time to speak out in support of The AAMC argues that researchers RESOURCES scientific research.” have an “ethical obligation…to make the His call to action may have been the results available publicly.” Given this MAKING BABIES tipping point for the 85% of Oxford obligation, the release of clinical trail students who approve of biomedical findings must be timely, subject to peer The recent release of Making Babies: research using animals. The movement review, unbiased, and with clear author- Reproductive Decisions and Genetic attracted hundreds of student support- ship. In order to realize these goals, the Technologies by the United Kingdom’s ers, whose spokesman, Iain Simpson, AAMC recommends that clinical trials Human Commission presents the says “Basically we want to get out there have a Publication and Analysis Commit- views of a prominent ethics body in the and make the point that…medical tee composed of trained experts, a UK on a range of ethical issues associ- research involving animals is essential if majority of whom should be non-industry ated with genetic screening, assisted medical science is to move forward.” employees, and be charged with monitor- reproduction technology (ART), and the Although the many faculty supporters ing and facilitating research dissemina- trajectory of genetic policy and research. are not all scientists, two prominent tion. A major theme of the report is the Oxford researchers have become absence of adequate information.

Winter 2006 Professional Ethics Report 6 ......

(Resources continued from page 6) of disabled persons. They encourage the discuss the ethical and social implications UK government to continue research of behavioral genetics research. The Potential parents are being offered neither efforts such as the Youth Citizen’s Jury, essays are intended to giver readers the clear information about the accuracy or which gathered feedback on various ART necessary tools to critically analyze the risks of genetic screening, nor the issues from a cross section of youth age findings of behavioral geneticists, explore opportunity to “opt out” of genetic 16 to 19 to address other gaps in public competing interpretations of the ethical screening processes. In response, the input. The report is available online via and social implications of those findings, HGC suggests counseling and social the HGC website at: http:// and engage in productive public conver- services should be offered to families of www.hgc.gov.uk/Client/ sation about them. children diagnosed with severe genetic document.asp?DocId=101&CAtegoryId=8IN THE SOCIETIES abnormalities during gestation. TIME FOR PLAGIARY? Parents deciding to refrain entirely from WHY WHEN YOU CAN screening during the pregnancy should G-E-O-OOGLE? A new journal, Plagiary: Cross- be assured their wishes will be respected Disciplinary Studies in Plagiarism, by their care provider and compensating Ethicists have a new tool to add to their Fabrication, and Falsification, was social services and support will be networking arsenal in the Global Ethics launched in January 2006. With cases available should they be required. Observatory, a database supported by such as the stem cell fraud scandal in Another glaring information gap UnitedIN Nation’s THE Educational SOCIETIES Scientific and South Korea and allegations of censor- found by the HGC was that of the inner Cultural Organization (UNESCO). The GEO ship and editorial license from NASA workings of private ART and donor went online this past December. The new scientists, the journal will offer an clinics. Collecting such information is search engine is designed to help science interdisciplinary forum to analyze crucial to effective policy making, and technology oriented ethicists from evidence of fraud and constraints on regulation, and public safety. Without around the world to collaborate in order to scientific freedom, as well as assess the careful monitoring, the HGC fears a realize shared goals. The current design in- damage such incidents have done to the number of abuses such as: improper cludes three interfaces. The first interface enterprise of scholarship. donor screening, consanguinity due to is the “Who’s Who in Ethics.” This engine The journal will include coverage in excessive use of a single donor’s ga- is collection of brief profiles on a number of the forms of research articles, editorials, metes, reproductive tourism (traveling to scholars, educators, policy makers, and of- perspective pieces, book reviews, and other countries to have procedures that ficials selected through peer review as key reader responses. Articles are published are banned in the U.K.), or even selective players in S&T ethics development. The online on a rolling basis and subject to genetics/eugenics. The report cited the second interface, “Ethics Institutions,” is a “referee recommendation.” Published U.S. case of a lesbian couple that directory of various organizational bodies articles are open-access and available in intentionally sought a deaf male donor as involved in S&T ethics. The “Ethics Teach- electronic format free of charge via the the father of their two deaf children. The ing Programmes”IN THE isSOCIETIES the third component of web at http://plagiary.org/. An annual HGC spoke out in support of current UK the GEO that provides information on sci- volume in hard-copy format will be procedures that prohibit such a case from ence and technology ethics courses and available for purchase at the end of each arising in the UK. While they emphasize programs of study. The “Ethics Related year. respect for deaf culture, they do not agree Legislation and Guidelines” represents the that such a procedure is in the best fourth arm of the GEO. While currently un- BIOETHICS FORUM interests of the child. Furthermore, just as available, it will be added at a later date and selective genetics for purposes of will cover laws and standards issues in S&T. The Bioethics Forum is a recently enhancement is not condoned, selection The GEO is available via the developed spin-off of the Hasting Center for specific genetic abnormalities should UNESCO homepage at: http:// Report. The Forum will focus solely on not be permitted. In addition, lack of www..org/shs/ethics/geo/user bioethics issues. The new site provides medical and psycho-social data on ?action=select&lng=en&db= real-time commentary from the Forum’s children born of ART leaves researchers own panel of ethics scholars, as well as with no way of determining if ART WRESTLING WITH links to recent bioethics articles in other children are more or less prone to certain BEHAVIORAL GENETICS open-access online journals. Covering medical conditions or suffer lasting issues like “patient care, health policy, mental harm. Such information could be Wrestling with Behavioral Genetics: medical science and research, biotechnol- invaluable to potential parents, doctors, Science, Ethics, and Public Conversa- ogy, the beginnings and endings of life, and social services providers who would tion is now available from The Johns and environment and health,” the site face these issues. Hopkins University Press. Edited by Erik aims to reflect on bioethics issues in a Finally, the HGC decried the lack of Parens, Audrey R. Chapman, and Nancy ‘timely’ manner while preserving the input from people of various religious, Press, this book brings together an confidence in expert authority lacking in ethnic, and social backgrounds. One interdisciplinary groups of contributors. some blog sites. The Bioethics Forum is markedly absent but necessary voice in Human geneticists, humanists, social available at: http://bioethicsforum.org/. the reproductive genetics dialogue is that scientists, lawyers, and journalists (Resources continued on page 8)

Winter 2006 Professional Ethics Report 7 (RESOURCES continued from page 7) “to improve ethical problem solving in Additional conference information is HUMAN RESERACH human research.” Subscription information available at http://web.utk.edu/~philosop/ PROTECTIONS is available at http://www.csueastbay.edu/ biomedconf.html JERHRE/. The Office of Human Research On December 1-3, 2006 the U.S. Office of th Protections (OHRP) has introduced a new Research Integrity will host the 4 web resource at http://www.hhs.gov/ Student Pugwash USA enables students to Research Conference on Research ohrp/related.html. Links to historical think independently about how the Integrity. The conference aims to further documents, federal register notices, development of cutting-edge science and understanding about way to foster internanational documents and Common technologies affect society--issues that integrity and deter misconduct in re- Rule agencies/departments are included. range from international security to public search. The conference will take place at Federal Register notices from 1995-2005 health, from global warming to the develop- the Safety Harbor Resort in Tampa Bay, are included as pdf files and links are ment of U.S. science policy. Student Florida. Abstracts for papers, posters, provided to international documents. Pugwash USA offers weekly updates on panels and working groups are due April science issues, job and internship opportu- 28, 2006. All abstracts must be submitted nities, and resources to help students take electronically. Preference will be given to ANNOUNCEMENTS socially responsible steps on campus. Sign studies that open new research areas, up at http://www.spusa.org/forms/ use new research methods or provide Call for Papers join_mailing.html . new insights into recognized research The editors of the Journal of Academic problems. Additional conference Ethics are requesting submissions of information is available at http:// original research on any aspect of the The Ethics Institute at Dartmouth College ori.hhs.gov/research/extra/rcri.html. ethical conduct of research involving is accepting nominations for the 2006 human subjects. A special issue will Dorsett Fellowship in applied ethics. The explore the wide range of ethical, research Dorsett Fellowship is awarded to senior The 12th Annual Conference on Teaching and administrative issues and problems faculty with experience in applied ethics, in Survival Skills and Ethics is offering faced by researchers, participants, any discipline. The Fellows are required to travel fellowships. The conference will sponsors and administrators. Papers that present public lectures, participate in select be held June 11-16, 2006 in Snowmass, address researcher-IRB interaction, seminars with faculty and students, and to Colorado. The conference is designed informed consent processes, on-going pursue their own research interest. The to prepare faculty and administrators to review, conflicts of interest, or other length of residence is negotiable, up to one establish or improve instruction in the relevant topics are desired. Abstracts term. Contact Aine Donovan, Executive responsible conduct of research and in should be submitted by May 1, 2006 to Director, at [email protected]. professional development. Conference Dr. Michael Owen ([email protected]). attendees will receive lecture outlines, The University of Tennessee, Knoxville is ethics cases, student handouts, readings, The first quarterly issues of the Journal hosting a conference on“Ethics & the slides, and a comprehensive bibliography. of Empirical Research on Human Business of Biomedicine” on April 6-8, Attendance is limited to 50 persons. Research Ethics (JERHRE) will be 2006. The conference will focus on values Additional information about the confer- published by UC Press in March. in relation to the business of medicine, and ence is available at http:// JERHRE is the only journal in the field of will cover such topics as ethical issues www.survival.pitt.edu/events/trainer.asp. human research ethics dedicated solely to concerning the pharmaceutical industry, empirical research. The aim of JERHRE is marketing and pricing, the purposes and function of HMO’s, physician practice The Peruvian University Cayetano groups and appropriate standards of care. Heredia will host the “Ethics around the world” conference in Lima, Peru on April 19-20, 2006. The conference is part of a Support From the Following Societies and series of ethics conferences around the Organizations is Gratefully Acknowledged: world sponsored by UNESCO. Topics such as ethics teaching programs and American Anthropological Association ethics education will be on the agenda, American Political Science Association as well as the draft Universal Declaration American Psychological Association on Bioethics and Human Rights will be discussed. See conference information Association for Psychological Science at http://portal.unesco.org/shs/en/ev.php- American Society for Engineering Education URL_ID=6201&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC& American Sociological Association URL_SECTION=201.html.

Winter 2006 Professional Ethics Report 8