By Brian D. Earp In a recent issue of the Journal of Medical Ethics, Thomas Ploug and Søren Holm point out that scientific communities can sometimes get pretty polarized. This happens when two different groups of researchers consistently argue for (more or less) opposite positions on some hot-button empirical issue. The examples they give are: […]
Latest articles
My One Appearance in “Cosmo”…
… and they go and screw it up. A few weeks (months?) ago, I got a call from Cosmopolitan to ask if I’d talk about home-testing kits for genetics – stuff like what 23andMe offers. We talked, and I like to think that I said something useful… and promptly forgot all about it, until just now, […]
Animal Liberation: Sacrificing the Good on the Altar of the Perfect?
For my money, one of the best papers at the nonhuman animal ethics conference at Birmingham a couple of weeks ago was Steve Cooke’s.* He was looking at the justifications for direct action in the name of disrupting research on animals, and presented the case – reasonably convincingly – that the main arguments against the permissibility of […]
The Talking Cure Taboo
Guest post by C Blease Talking cures have never been so accessible. Since 2007 the UK government has invested £300 million launching its Improved Access to Psychological Treatments scheme. The goal is to train up to 4000 therapists in a particular branch of psychotherapy – cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT). CBT is the most widely researched […]
Incentives, Penalties, and Vaccination.
This popped up on my FB feed yesterday: a proposal from the Australian government that certain child welfare payments should be withheld from parents who refuse to vaccinate their kids based on “conscientious objection”. Parents who do not vaccinate their children will lose welfare payments of up to $2100 per child under a federal government […]
Animals in US Laboratories: Who Counts, Who Matters?
Guest post by Alka Chandna How many animals are experimented on in laboratories? It’s a simple question, the answer to which provides a basic parameter to help us wrap our heads around the increasingly controversial and ethically harrowing practice of locking animals in cages and conducting harmful procedures on them that are often scary, painful, and […]
The Death of Sidaway: Values, Judgments and Informed Consent
Guest post by Kirsty Keywood (University of Manchester) On 11th March Nadine Montgomery won her case before the UK Supreme Court to gain compensation for the failure of her obstetrician to warn her of risks associated with the vaginal delivery of a large infant – a risk which she would have averted by requesting a […]
Flogging and the Medic
You must, by now, have heard of the Saudi Arabian blogger Raif Badawi. Just in case you haven’t (really?), here’s a potted biography: having set up the secularist forum Free Saudi Liberals, he was arrested for insulting Islam and showing disobedience. Among the formal charges he faced was one for apostasy, which carries the death penalty in Saudi. […]
Bye-Bye Saatchi Bill?
It would appear that Lord Saatchi’s Medical Innovation Bill is toast. The Lib Dems, who are reportedly the ones to have vetoed it, are nevertheless being mealy-mouthed about something they should be proclaiming from the rooftops: the Bill is/ was needless at best, and possibly dangerous. But, hey: there’s an election coming up, and cancer treatment […]
Autonomy and the Circumcision Wars
Guest Post by Akim McMath In December of last year, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) released its proposed new recommendations on male circumcision. The verdict? Circumcision provides major benefits with minimal risks. These benefits accrue whether circumcision is performed in infancy or later on in life. Circumcision may even help to stem the […]