Tuesday, April 29, 2008
-
My Featured Question:
Is it Ethical to use the medical data collected during the holocaust by Nazi doctors to practical use today?
recommend this to your friends, because their opinion matters too, right?
May I for a moment stand on a soapbox and show xanga that featured questions should be questions that make you think, and discuss if necessary.
-
recommend
- recs 5
- give stars
- votes 21
-
share
-
email
- sent 0
Post a Comment
- Back to antisoccermom's Xanga Site!
- Note: your comment will appear in antisoccermom's local time zone: GMT -05:00 (Eastern Standard - US, Canada)
Comments (53)
No, there are other sources for this data.
We covered this topic in a biomedical ethics course that I took. And I say, yes. It is ethical. The information is already there and if it can benefit people NOW and help their medical situations, how can it not be ethical to use already gathered information?
Yes it is. It is unfortunate that the information was obtained in such a way, but that is in the past and the past is something that we can never change. Evil things never have to remain evil, we can always find some way to use it for good.
*note that I am not saying that is was merely unfortunate that many people died, that was a tragedy.
@awth44 - I completely agree. You stated it much better than I had, but that was exactly what I meant.
@awth44 - Couldn't have said it better myself.
I think a lot has been learned from the past.
@LifeNeedsProtection - you didnt answer the questions my dear.
We can learn from their mistakes.
How's that??
Would it be ethical not to, especially if the ill gotten knowledge could be used to save lives?
To be honest, this is an argument where both sides can be can be argued until one is blue in the face. I think that is that tragic that we gained so much medical knowledge from such ghastly experiments. Unfortunately, this is a Pandora's Box which can't be closed.
There was a Star Trek: Voyager episode dedicated to this question but altered to use the Bajoran Holocaust in story. After much contemplation about this topic previously, I came to conclude that it's unethical. And not just because the characters on Voyager came to the same conclusion.
In fact, I stopped using Bayer products years ago because I found out they did most of the experiments on people in the concentration camps.
I agree with Redshirte on this, too, that it is an argument that probably can't be won by either side.
@methodElevated - bayer products that save lives?
@methodElevated - would you REFUSE medical treatment if it was only a bayer product that could save your life, simply because they experimented with what they had?
however, i don't think that necessarily makes use of the knowledge ethical, and by no means does it justify the means by which it was obtained.
@antisoccermom - I don't care if anyone else uses the Bayer products, but I have my personal convictions. I won't support them.
@antisoccermom - I can't give you an honest answer until I'm actually in that situation.
...personal convictions are convenient when you don't actually have to deal with the issue on an intimate level... I'm not proud of it, but it's the truth.
@methodElevated - I applaud your honesty.
I agree with awth44.
@Ultra_Bright - Dear UltraBright. Because you are my friend, I will not accept an answer that is so lame as to just agree with someone else. How do you really feel? Wait, are you jewish?
"Find the good in bad."
A fortune cookie taught me this message long ago, and I've tried to always keep it in mind.
Ethics should rarely stop us from learning something that benefits the world.
Jehovah's Witnesses think blood transfusions are unethical.
I say not using the information would be unethical. How many people died during the holocaust? What better way to honor them than to take a tragic situation and turn it into something that benefits everyone?
The information is there, unfortunately. The means for which that information was gathered shouldn't hinder our using it for good.
Yes it it, if there's any "good" thing about all this, it's the medical data that can now help to save lives. To not use it because of where it comes from would be a waste.
Trying to put myself in the shoes of the poor people who were experimented on, personally, if what I had to go through could save a life in the future, then I would prefer that.
@antisoccermom -
If I were Jewish you'd know, you beeach.
So I think that if you refused to listen to certain types of research because they were unethical, then you would have to not recognize ANY unethical research.
So, if you felt that abortion was wrong, would all stem cell research have to be discredited? OR, what about animal testing? Should we not credit animal testing because it can be considered unethical in some cases?
I'm not saying any of these things are right or wrong, but because they have already been done, shouldn't we use it?
Let's not condone what's in the past, but we shouldn't ignore it either.
HOW's THAT?
@Ultra_Bright - thanks. I knew you could do better.
@antisoccermom - thanks for making me
The plain and simple fact of the matter is the answer is yes. It's no different than data collected by America doctors during WII, Korea, or Vietnam. Nothing different than doctors during the Civil War. Or even doctors of any nation during any time of conflict.
They're working with what they've got. If they find something that works better or saves lives, then kudos to them. Labeling it as "Nazi data" serves the same purpose as labeling Galileo as a heretic because he didn't agree with the Church. Its small minding thinking that refuses to accept something better just because of beliefs or moral principles. Like refusing medical care for your kids because God will take care of you in his own way.
The only purpose to calling it Nazi data would be to remind us of the mistakes and boundries that we mustn't cross again to expand the medical knowledge.