Guidelines to Prevent Malevolent Use of Biomedical Research

Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 15 (4):432-439 (2006)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In February 1975, a group of leading scientists, physicians, and policymakers convened at Asilomar, California, to consider the safety of proceeding with recombinant DNA research. The excitement generated by the promise of this new technology was counterbalanced by concerns regarding dangers that might arise from it, including the potential for accidental release of genetically modified organisms into the environment. Guidelines developed at the conference to direct future research endeavors had several consequences. They permitted research to resume, bringing to an end the voluntary moratorium that the National Academy of Sciences had instituted several months earlier. They also served to illustrate that the scientific community was capable of self-governance, thereby securing public trust and persuading Congress not to institute legislative restrictions. Finally, they underscored the importance of weighing unforeseen risks inherent in some research against potential benefits that may arise from these same endeavors

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,247

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Commentary: The Ethics of Dangerous Discovery.Michael J. Selgelid - 2006 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 15 (4):444-447.
A framework for risk-benefit evaluations in biomedical research.Annette Rid & David Wendler - 2011 - Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 21 (2):141-179.
Commentary: The Application of Medical Ethics in Biomedical Research.Michael E. Frisina - 2006 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 15 (4):439-441.
The Regulation of Technology.Mary Warnock - 1998 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 7 (2):173-175.
Why Guidelines for Research Ethics in Science and Technology Should Consider Irreparable Research, and Why They Don’t.Gunnar Hartvigsen - 2018 - In Fernando Ferri, Ned Dwyer, Saša Raicevich, Patrizia Grifoni, Husne Altiok, Hans Thor Andersen, Yiannis Laouris & Cecilia Silvestri (eds.), Responsible Research and Innovation Actions in Science Education, Gender and Ethics: Cases and Experiences. Cham: Springer Verlag. pp. 87-93.

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-08-24

Downloads
41 (#545,769)

6 months
10 (#404,653)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

A framework for risk-benefit evaluations in biomedical research.Annette Rid & David Wendler - 2011 - Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 21 (2):141-179.
An Argument for Fewer Clinical Trials.Kirstin Borgerson - 2016 - Hastings Center Report 46 (6):25-35.
Ethics committees are not enough.Sven Ove Hansson - 2024 - Theoria 90 (4):357-360.
Military Medical Ethics.Michael L. Gross - 2013 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 22 (1):92-109.

View all 6 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references