September 2010
Caplan asks, "Does 'super' salmon pass the sniff test?"
In his MSNBC column this week, Arthur Caplan wonders whether the ado over the "AquaAdvantage" salmon is overblown, but ultimately comes down on the side of consumer disclosure.
"So, should you fear this fish?" Caplan asks. "In terms of eating, I don't think so. In terms of environmental risk, maybe a little bit."
All I keep thinking about is that hilarious scene from Monty Python's The Meaning of Life involving the infamous "canned salmon" in the salmon mousse. Perhaps a 21st century update of that scene would need to involve "Darling, you didn't use GMO salmon, did you?"
In any case, you can read Caplan's column here and watch Monty Python below.
Summer Johnson, PhD
Another Bioethics Program in the MA in Bioethics Game...
The another recent addition to the crowd of masters degrees in bioethics is the program at SUNY Stonybrook.
Based within their Center for Medical Humanities, Compassionate Care and Bioethics, this program is a MA in Biological Sciences with a track for medical humanities compassionate care and bioethics.
The program, which begins in Spring 2011, offers a wide range of courses in bioethics including Landmark Cases in Bioethics, Global Bioethics, and Empirical Bioethics.
To learn more, click here.
Summer Johnson, PhD
Guinea-Pigging: It's Not A Real Word, But It's A Real-World Phenomenon
Watch to see the story of "The Life of a Professional Guinea Pig" courtesy of TIME.
Spencer, or as I would describe him a walking human pin cushion (shown below), tells his story of being a healthy volunteer for Phase I research. The rest of the 10-minute film goes on to explain about the dark under-belly of professional research participation for healthy subjects.
Most enlightening statement in the film: "guinea-pigging really isn't a profession." Well, to be clear "guinea-pigging" really isn't even a word. But it clearly is a well established part of the research establishment, as many of us know and this video clearly demonstrates.
Summer Johnson, PhD
FDA and Office of Human Research Protection Respond to Fetal Dex Complaint
The September issue of The American Journal of Bioethics, presaged by such astonishing articles as "The Lesbian Drug" in Newsweek, stretched the boundaries of the Journal by engaging questions about the relationship between advocacy and scholarship, the meaning of transgressing boundaries in that regard, and the extraordinary implications of the social and medical debate concerning the administration of dexamethasone during pregnancy in females with congenital adrenal hyperplasia. With the release of the September issue of the Journal, both the FDA and OHRP have released letters responding to the complaints that are the subject of the Target Article by Drs. McCullough, Chervenak et al., and rebuttal from Alice Dreger et al.. In these, the agencies respond directly to accusations made on http://fetaldex.org and in letter form to the Agencies and to Weill Cornell Medical College, among others, regarding Dr. Maria New. New's commentary can also be found in AJOB today, as can the response to commentators, available free, from McCullough et al., all of which is at http://bioethics.net/journal
LETTER FROM THE FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION
LETTER FROM THE OFFICE OF HUMAN RESEARCH PROTECTIONS
-Glenn McGee
September Issue of AJOB is Now Online!
Okay, so it's quite like the September issue of Vogue--neither is it 1,000 pages long nor does it set the fashion trends for the upcoming year nor take an entire year to produce. Nor has anyone decided to make a documentary about the exciting AJOB editorial office....yet.
But that said, the September issue of The American Journal of Bioethics is definitely worth reading. Its two Target Articles address important issues in the field. First, Mark Rothstein asks whether the deidentification of health data is sufficient to protect research subjects and concludes that it is a blunt tool that fails in many cases to adequately protect the interests and concerns of most subjects.
Second, McCullough, Chervernak, Hippen and Brent introduce the concept of "transgressive bioethics" as it relates to the writing of a letter of concern by bioethicists who took a stand against research they believed to be unethical. McCullough et al argue themselves that the letter itself and the campaign against the research were in fact the actions that were problematic, not the research itself. Who's right and who's wrong? Read the Target Article and the OPCs to decide for yourself!
Summer Johnson, PhD
McGee: Back on the Embryonic Stem Cell Merry-Go-Round, But Going In A New Direction
On the Bioethics Channel, Dr. Glenn McGee, the John B. Francis Chair in Bioethics at the Center for Practical Bioethics, stakes out his own position regarding the recent U.S. District Court judge's decision to deny federal funding for embryonic stem cell research.
McGee's view? First, that no one yet in the discourse has come up with a unique position regarding this issue, whether bioethicist, pundit or politician. Thus, this is just the same old merry-go-round brought back to life again.
Yet, this time around the debate is just a LITTLE bit different....
There is no longer the debate, says McGee, that pits adult stem cell research versus embryonic stem cell research. Instead there are separate debates over what kind of adult stem cell research is merited and others over what kinds of embryonic research (if any) can be done with federal funding.
Want to hear McGee for yourself? Click here to listen to McGee's take on the issue.
Summer Johnson, PhD
