La tunisie Medicale - 2022 ; Vol 100 ( n°010 ) : 659-663
[ 1156 times seen ]
Summary
Given the long history of abuse of prisoners in medical experimentation, it is understandable that additional safeguards have been established to protect this social category. However, the debate between the detractors and the supporters of the medical experimentation in the prison environment is still going on. The present history note, the fourth in a series on medical experimentation on prisoners, intended to relate the main arguments of both sides: ie; the detractors and supporters of medical experimentation on prisoners.
Key - Words
Article
Reference
  1. Pont J. Ethics in research involving prisoners. Int J Prison Health. 2008;4(4):184-97.
  2. Strassle C, Jardas E, Ochoa J, Berkman BE, Danis M, Rid A, et al. Covid-19 vaccine trials and incarcerated people - The ethics of inclusion. N Engl J Med. 2020;383(20):1897-9.
  3. Gaddas M, Jedidi M, Masmoudi T, Ben Saad H. Medical experimentation on prisoners (part 1): historical milestones. Tunis Med. 2022;100(06):423-7.
  4. Gaddas M, Ben Dhiab M, Ben Saad H. Medical experimentation on prisoners (part 2): role of doctors in research abuses. Tunis Med 2022; 100 (07) : 497-501
  5. Gaddas M, Jedidi M, Ben Khelil M, Ben Saad H. Medical experimentation on prisoners (part 3): the main milestones of the evolving ethical’ texts and codes. Tunis Med 2022 ; 100 (07) : 572-577
  6. Cohen MM, Jr. Genetic drift. Overview of German, Nazi, and Holocaust medicine. Am J Med Genet A. 2010;152A(3):687-707.
  7. Hornblum A. Subjected to medical experimentation: Pennsylvania’s contribution to “science” in prisons. Pa Hist. 2000;67(3):415-26.
  8. Miles SH. The new military medical ethics: legacies of the Gulf Wars and the War on Terror. Bioethics. 2013;27(3):117-23.
  9. ACHER Report. Chapter 9: The Oregon and Washington experiments. Téléchargeable via ce lien: https://ehss.energy. gov/ohre/roadmap/achre/chap9_2.html[dernière visite: 18 septembre 2022]
  10. Wiegand TJ. Captive subjects: pharmaceutical testing and prisoners. J Med Toxicol. 2007;3(1):37-9.
  11. White LP. Biomedical experimentation on prisoners. West J Med. 1976;124(6):514-6.
  12. United States Holocaust memory museum. Introduction to the Holocaust. Téléchargeable via ce lien: https://encyclopedia. ushmm.org/content/en/article/introduction-to-the-holocaust. [dernière visite: 14 septembre 2022]
  13. Weindling P, von Villiez A, Loewenau A, Farron N. The victims of unethical human experiments and coerced research under National Socialism. Endeavour. 2016;40(1):1-6.
  14. Toledano R. Anatomy in the Third Reich - The Anatomical Institute of the Reichsuniversitat Strassburg and the deliveries of dead bodies. Ann Anat. 2016;205:128-44.
  15. Chwang E. Against risk-benefit review of prisoner research. Bioethics. 2010;24(1):14-22.
  16. Joubert D, Archambault K, Brown G. Cycle of coercion: experiences of maltreatment and disciplinary measures in Canadian inmates. Int J Prison Health. 2014;10(2):79-93.
  17. Moser DJ, Arndt S, Kanz JE, Benjamin ML, Bayless JD, Reese RL, et al. Coercion and informed consent in research involving prisoners. Compr Psychiatry. 2004;45(1):1-9.
  18. Largent E, Grady C, Miller FG, Wertheimer A. Misconceptions about coercion and undue influence: reflections on the views of IRB members. Bioethics. 2013;27(9):500-7.
Login
E-mail :
Password :
Remember Me Forgot password? Sign UP
Archives
2023
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
Keywords most used
Tunisia treatment Child diagnosis surgery prognosis epidemiology Children Risk factors Crohn’s disease prevalence Breast cancer screening obesity Cancer
Newsletter
Sign up to receive our newsletter
E-mail :
Stay in Touch
Join Us! !