What is Bioethics? (Basics 1); Premonition Intro/prologue/1
- "Bioethics" just means what?
- What 40-year U.S. study denied information and treatment to its subjects?
- What did Ivan Ilich warn about in Medical Nemesis?
- In what issues has the WHO been very active?
- How has Bioethics broadened its horizons?
- Bioethics has broken free of what mentality?
- With what must the main method of Bioethics be concerned?
- Are there any important bioethical issues you think Campbell has neglected to mention in ch.1
- Lewis's previous book asked what question?
- What did The Lancet point out about the COVID death rate in the U.S.?
- Bob Glass learned what, that he'd had no idea of, in The Great Influenza? Did you know that, before COVID?
- How did young Charity Dean cheer herself up?
- (Your Premonition questions)
A Bioethics MOOC-
Some Bioethics TED Talks - https://www.ted.com/topics/bioethics
Michael Lewis on The Premonition-
In 2018, Michael Lewis published “The Fifth Risk,” which argued, in short, that the federal government was underprepared for a variety of disaster scenarios. Guess what his new book is about? Lewis visits the podcast this week to discuss “The Premonition,” (https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/06/bo...) which recounts the initial response to the coronavirus pandemic.“It wasn’t just Trump,” Lewis says. “Trump made everything worse. But there had ben changes in the American government, and changes in particular at the C.D.C., that made them less and less capable of actually controlling disease and more and more like a fine academic institution that came in after the battle and tried to assess what had happened; but not equipped for actual battlefield command. The book doesn’t get to the pandemic until Page 160. The back story tells you how the story is going to play out.”
Posted for Jaxon: Questions:
ReplyDeleteCharity used to cheer herself up by reading historical books on the Bubonic Plague.
Bioethics refers to the ethics of life, although the book says that this definition is restricted to just human life for the sake of the subject matter.
The 40-year-old experiment that was done was known as the Tuskegee Syphillis Study. This study was inhumane and willfully prevented the treatment and care of syphilis patients in order to study the effects of syphilis.
The Tuskegee Syphilis Study directly reveals the problem with thinking of morality in a strictly utilitarian mindset. The scientists conducting the experiment might argue that the benefits gleaned from conducting the experiment could outweigh the damage done to the men in the study, but the ends do not and did not justify the means. It was undignified for researchers to do to the community and violated these men physically and mentally.
DeleteI'd say it was definitely "worth it" in the sense of scientific advancement. It was clearly not "worth it" for the individuals being unknowingly experimented on. The real question is whether you value the ethics of the individual more than that of the collective. I go for individual myself.
DeleteIvan Illich warned that immense power of the pharmaceutical industry was a threat to public health, a viewpoint which proved to be controversial.
ReplyDeleteWHO is active in issues such as tobacco use, HIV/AIDS, and global pandemics.
Bioethics has broadened its horizons by examining the ways societal issues can impact health, and by expanding to view issues from global rather than western perspectives.
I heard on the news today that Trump is going to withdraw America from the WHO. As you said, they help with so many health related issues. I also heard that the WHO gives us up to date flu vaccine information that we will likely need to make our own program to replace. That sounds like expensive data to replicate, and I doubt our replication would be as accurate unless we work hard to collect data world wide. The flu also travels here from other countries, so just collecting a sample locally would give less effective results.
DeleteI am not sure about that. The USA is by the largest contributor to WHO, as well as being the country that produces the majority of medical advancements. From a medical standpoint I believe we will barely notice a change. Losing the influence we have over WHO, and by proxy the rest of the world, is a bigger concern.
DeleteAre there any important bioethical issues you think Campbell has neglected to mention in ch.1?
ReplyDeleteI heard a data scientist discuss an interesting bioethical issue. Apparently, many people with the same diseases have very similar google searches leading up to their diagnosis. The scientist wondered if it would be ethical for google to make that person aware that they might have that disease. For instance, a person with diabetes might google that they are always thirsty and that sometimes their vision blurs. Google might be able to suggest being checked for diabetes to people who have googled these symptoms in tandem. The scientist was worried about google collecting and sharing the data that would make this possible on a wider scale. I would imagine doctors would worry that people might rely on google rather than seeking professional advice. What do you all think? Should google inform people of possible diseases they might have based on their google searches?
This is a very interesting perspective. I think that google already collects all this data, surely they know every thing you have ever searched using their engine. I can see the argument that doctors might worry about people relying on google for medical advice but this is already a prevalent issue with things like webmd. If google can accurately predict a diagnosis based upon search history in a way that can help a given individual have a more favorable outcome regarding their health then I believe it is their moral obligation to share this data that they likely have already collected.
DeleteI think that in an ideal world, Google (or whoever holds the personal data) should freely distribute this information to whomever they have data on. But unfortunately, because of the economic system we exist under, Google would rather sell this information to pharmaceutical companies so that they can advertise to us directly, or they would offer us this information but at a price. They would save us but only if they can get something out of it. And they already have all this information stored somewhere but can we access it? As far as I'm aware, it's not possible; they just have our data stored somewhere and we don't even know the full extent of what they have.
DeleteI find it interesting that in the basics the author mentions how each medical advance has brought about new ethical dilemmas. Particularly the concept of a new definition of death, brain death. Perhaps in the future there could be something like a digital immortality, a formless existence. Once technology advances sufficiently there may be a way to upload one's consciousness. Now is that a good idea? I don't think so, but it may lead to a new new definition of death.
ReplyDeleteI wonder (and I think to perform this experiment would be ethically wrong) if someone is able to live forever, like actually upload their consciousness to someplace external that can sustain their mind forever, how their psychology would change over time. Would they devolve into insanity? Would they become very wise with time? I would like very much to communicate with someone who has been around for so long.
DeleteI also think it is a bad idea—we continuously stray further and further for natural death. I’m a believer of “when it’s your time to go, you need to go.” Also involving technology to extend your existence—I feel like it wouldn’t be that person full and actual self but rather a combination of their consciousness and technology. How would we treat those people? As a human or something else? Like we said in class, they have the potential to become a new type of “elite.”
Delete1. "Bioethics" simply means the 'ethics of life' or the moral implications regarding human welfare and how it might/had changed.
ReplyDelete2. In the 1940's, hundreds of African American men with late stage syphilis were monitored without being told of their condition or possible effective medication strategies, weakening public trust of health officials throughout the country.
In chapter one of the basics the author fails to give mention to a few issues that permeate healthcare in America. (Though these issues likely are addressed later on in the text) The chief among these in my view is the privatization of healthcare and more generally the exorbitant price of care in America. To me this is one of the greatest issues the average American has to face. Someone who lacks insurance and suffers an injury will be placed into inexorable insurmountable debt with 58.5% of respondents to a 2019 study by David U Himmelstein et Al. agreeing that medical debt somewhat or very much contributed to their bankruptcy. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6366487/
ReplyDeleteI think it's interesting that there is an understanding amongst medical professionals that the relationship they have with their patients is not meant to be "contractual", but "covenantal" as the author says. Human empathy and connection is vital for ensuring the patient's safety, and consent for whatever treatment they are seeking. Treating an illness is foundational to what makes humans so unique and persistent (we care for each other and don't let each other die), yet the medical system is for profit and prioritizes the goals of the executives over the patient, who is often regarded as a mere "client" or "costumer of healthcare". It seems there is a lack of acknowledgement of bioethics in our healthcare system, even though doctors mostly do their best to do what's right for their patient.
ReplyDeleteI feel as the medical industry kind of forces doctors to have contractual aspects of the patient to doctor relationship. I have seen online that many doctors themselves don’t agree with medicine prices or excessive testing for insurance purposes but their jobs require them to do so. It seems like the medical industry wants to silence the discussion of bioethics especially now that it’s such a profitable market. It would also explain the increasing lack of humanity courses in college and medical school.
DeleteLewis's previous book asked what question?
ReplyDeleteThe fifth risk (Lewis’s previous book) asked the question; “What happens when the people in charge of managing these risks, along with the experts who understand them, have no interest in them?” My response is that despite the amount of resources and skill in the country, the result of this risk management is failure. If there is no passion and commitment to accomplishing something, you will not do your best work or work at all even. My response is quite similar to Lewis’s since he discusses how the United States according to a study in 2019 was supposed to be the country most ready for a pandemic. We all know what actually happened, however. And Lewis’s makes this great comparison to college football to America’s performance. On a extra note, I think the difference is palpable between Trump’s COVID management versus Biden’s and I think this is due to their attitudes about the pandemic. At least, it seemed that way in the public.
This is Elijah Carney
ReplyDelete1) Bioethics mean the ethics of life and concern medical "problems."
2) The WHO concerns breastfeeding, global public health, pandemics, tobacco use, etc
Also, I believe that bioethics is definitely important and has made great strides since it's beginning.
I just want to make a comment on the hypocrisy of the people calling the one bishop a “fake Christian” for telling Trump to have mercy on people who are gay, lesbian, and transgender as well as immigrants. I wonder what goes on in the people that can say full heartedly they’re a Christian and say awful things like that about people who are teaching messages of good to people.
ReplyDeleteA particular Bible verse that comes to mind goes along the lines of “Do you know how difficult it is for the rich to get enter God’s Kingdom? Let me tell you, it’s easier to gallop a camel through a needle’s eye than for the rich to enter God’s kingdom.”
Based
ReplyDelete