As explained in the Introductory Comments to Unit Seven, pretty much all of the
ID: 67440 • Letter: A
Question
As explained in the Introductory Comments to Unit Seven, pretty much all of the research studies taken up by the Institutional Review Boards at the hospitals here in Joplin are Phase III studies in which the subjects are very sick people looking for experimental treatments for their diseases or medical conditions. These subjects are not paid for their participation, and they hope for some clinical benefit for themselves. On the other hand, Phase I studies – those that test the safety of potential drugs – almost always involve healthy subjects who are paid for their participation. In addition, more and more these studies are being conducted by for-profit private firms that are hired by pharmaceutical companies to test their drugs, and, needless to say, there have been abuses. One operation in Miami, Florida, for example, run by a company called SFBC International, was shut down by police in 2006 when it was found that a sizable number of subjects in their studies were undocumented immigrants, that the medical director was not licensed to practice, and that some of the studies being conducted were approved by a for-hire IRB owned by the wife of an SFBC vice president.
The question for you on this Discussion Board Thread concerns whether research subjects should be paid, and if so, how much? The drug companies and private firms that sponsor the research make a lot of money. The doctors and scientists who conduct the research make a lot of money (according to the Tufts Center for the Study of Drug Development, as of 2006, 64% of these researchers now work for private companies for money, rather than in academia, where their motives are less venal). So should the subjects who take part in the studies also be paid? And should they be paid handsomely? There are now literally thousands of “professional” research subjects in this country, who have made “guinea pigging,” as they call it, a career. One of these professional guinea pigs even publishes an “industry” magazine called “Guinea Pig Zero,” (http://www.guineapigzero.com/) and claims to earn in excess of $30,000.00 per year.
So what do you think are the arguments on both sides of this issue? And which side do you think is right? The medical advances we make as a society are being tested on the backs of the poor, as they once were on the backs of slaves, and as they were in Nazi Germany on the backs of political prisoners? Does the fact that we pay participants a small fee make a difference morally?
Explanation / Answer
Yes, this is the matter if deep concern. If we want to promot research in different aspects of medical sciences then subjects, research scholars, scientist and all the associted research persons should be [aid handsomely. Because, at the end of the day, each and every person think about the bread and butter, if they are paid for the work then they may take more interest in doing the wotk.
If, a once such suitation arises where the medical feild dont have enough money to commence the paid research but the research aspect is essential for the prevention of futher commencement of disease then only such research should be promoted non-paid. Otherwise, yes the reseach associated subjects or person should be paid for there respective work
Related Questions
Navigate
Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.