SBC Testing Without Treatment in Tuskegee Discussion

1-Watch the videos below

Video 1: Testing Without Treatment in Tuskegee: A Medical Turning Point (9’ 54’’)

Video 2: Researcher ‘Floored’ by Discovery of Intentional Infections in Guatemala (7’ 30’’)

2- Answer the following questions, and discuss with your classmates. You need to respond to at least two classmates to obtain full points for the discussion.

Q1- What basic ethical principles and considerations you learned in the IRB training were violated in each of the studies mentioned in the videos? Please explain.

Tuskegee experiment-

STDs in Guatemala-

Q2- Why do you think the experiments were conducted in African American males and Guatemalan prisoners, soldiers and individuals with mental illness? What populations do you see at risk in the world today? Why? 

First peer Smith

Many ethical principles were violated in both the Tuskegee study , testing without treatment and the Guatemalan prisoner study. African American males from a vulnerable population were not given Respect of Persons rights. One of the main duties of researchers today is to give subjects autonomy, the ability to choose if they actual want to undergo the study at all. These participants were misled into thinking they would benefit from the treatment of ” The Bad Blood” in their community. Participants were also violated from a lack of Protection. These participants had very little education and were not fully educated on the harmful intentions of the study. Furthermore, researchers held treatment back from participants even when they asked for treatments that were given to individuals living in their community. This violated the Principle of Justice. Researchers became the ultimate decision makers in a sensitive, life-threatening study which participants were never given a chance to reverse.

During the STD study in Guatemala, were not given autonomy or the benefit of Beneficence. Researchers did not minimize risks and maximize benefits to prisoners. In fact, when this life altering disease wasn’t spreading fast enough through implanted infected prostitutes, researchers directly violated human rights by injecting the disease directly into prisoners without their consent or knowledge. This carefully constructed plan violated the Respect of Persons and correlated mistreatment of subjects from a vulnerable and isolated population which was unable to defend or decide if the study was appropriate, beneficial, or harmful.

I think the experiments were conducted in African American males and Guatemalan prisoners, soldiers and individuals with mental illness for several reasons. One, these populations were unable to understand the long term effects of the study, these populations were assumed to die anyway, more than half the population of the African American study were already infected with syphilis, and previous efforts and treatments sometimes ended in death, these populations were deemed unimportant to most of the world, based on race, isolation, unwanted populations with mental illness, and assumed risks in the military to not survive war.

In the world today I see populations at risk to include, indigenous communities, populations with mental illnesses, homeless individuals, poor communities and communities with extreme lack and poverty. Although rules and protocol have been set in place from the early 1930s to protect individuals and communities from predatory research, there is no way to totally regulate studies, especially if practices are obscure and intentional. Also, I feel that vulnerable populations can be enticed with the lure of money and assets to fill voids to obtain illegal studies. 

Last peer

Francis

Q1.

Not only were the test subjects harmed, they were not given information about the experiment. These facts go against the principles of not harming the subjects and also giving the subjects information about the experiment being carried out. The scholars also did not consider how to deal with the harmful aftereffects of their experiments.

They also targeted weaker individuals, namely individuals who they could experiment on without needing to worry about repercussions from the public. They also placed the wellbeing of one group (the public) over others (people being experimented on).

Q2.

I assume it’s because these individuals were looked down upon, or were not protected in some way. I believe African Americans were viewed as lesser in the past and so the scientist was more willing to experiment on them. Others involved in the experiment were also more willing to harm these individuals, especially for the sake of helping others.

As for individuals with mental illness, I believe they were viewed in a similar light as African Americans.

As for my second point about not being protected, I believe soldiers and prisoners can be viewed in that light. Soldiers are viewed as more disposable, a point that might also apply to men, while prisoners are frowned upon. For prisoners, this means they receive less protection than non-prisoners.

These factors made targeting these individuals easier for multiple reasons. The public might not make as big an uproar due to viewing these individuals as lessers. The experimenters might feel less guilt. Lastly, laws might not extend to these individuals.

Today, I feel like people with mental illness, prisoners, and soldiers are at risk. I believe these individuals might still be viewed as lessers or disposable, and not as protected as people from other groups