Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Methodological and Ethical Risks Associated with the Epistemic Unification of Tribe Members.Joanna K. Malinowska - 2021 - American Journal of Bioethics 21 (10):32-34.
    Saunkeah et al. analyze the aptness of extending the Belmont Principles of Respect for Persons, Beneficence and Justice to AI/AN tribal communities as a whole. They argue that to protect AI/...
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • The Fifth Face of Fair Subject Selection: Population Grouping.Tomasz Żuradzki - 2020 - American Journal of Bioethics 20 (2):41-43.
    The article by MacKay and Saylor (2020) claims that the principle of fair subject selection yields conflicting imperatives (e.g. in the case of pregnant women) and should be understood as “a bundle of four distinct sub-principles” (i.e. fair inclusion, burden sharing, opportunity, distribution of third-party risks), each having conflicting normative recommendations (MacKay and Saylor 2020). The authors also offer guidance as to how we should navigate between subprinciples that may conflict with each other. The problem is a crucial one since (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Context is Needed When Assessing Fair Subject Selection.G. Owen Schaefer - 2020 - American Journal of Bioethics 20 (2):20-22.
    Volume 20, Issue 2, February 2020, Page 20-22.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Non-Epistemological Values in Collaborative Research in Neuroscience: The Case of Alleged Differences Between Human Populations.Joanna K. Malinowska & Tomasz Żuradzki - 2020 - American Journal of Bioethics Neuroscience 11 (3):203-206.
    The goals and tasks of neuroethics formulated by Farahany and Ramos (2020) link epistemological and methodological issues with ethical and social values. The authors refer simultaneously to the social significance and scientific reliability of the BRAIN Initiative. They openly argue that neuroethics should not only examine neuroscientific research in terms of “a rigorous, reproducible, and representative neuroscience research process” as well as “explore the unique nature of the study of the human brain through accurate and representative models of its function (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • A Call for Critical, Antiracist Medicine: Response to Open Peer Commentaries.Javier Perez-Rodriguez & Alejandro de la Fuente - 2017 - American Journal of Bioethics 17 (9):1-2.
    The consideration of racial differences in the biology of disease and treatment options is a hallmark of modern medicine. However, this time-honored medical tradition has no scientific basis, and the premise itself, that is, the existence of biological differences between the commonly known races, is false inasmuch as races are only sociocultural constructions. It is time to rid medical research of the highly damaging exercise of searching for supposed racial differences in the biological manifestations of disease. The practice not only (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark