Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post - Human Guinea Pigs: Government-funded researchers tested AIDS drugs on foster children

matthew330 · 05-09-2005, 11:24 AM

No they didn't inject them, in a nutshell, violations of the Tuskegee Syphillis trial included the following:

-Informed consent was never obtained
- not to mention they were coerced by being offered free physical exams, rides to and from clinics, hot meals on exam days, and burial stipends of $50.00

-No formal protocol ever existed
-The men were never told they had "syphilis"
-Treatment for syphilis was never given (though they were promised treatment for "bad blood")
-Treatment was denied even after penicillin was discovered in the 1940's

The results:
-28 dead of syphilis
-100 dead of related complications
-40 wives infected
-19 children born with congenital syphilis

The above mentioned trial has already been compared to Nazi war crimes which led to the first of the major ethical guidlines for human subjects research (The nuremberg code). The Tuskegee trial led to the third (The Belmont Report). These are some of the most notorious voliations of ethics in research, which led to massive overhauls in the way trials were conducted.

There is only a question in the above mentioned trial of whether or not the investigators should have insured independent advocates were acting in the participants behalf. They did give assent to the study, as required by law.

So you've tried Nazi Germany, tried Tuskegee, go ahead and give Willowbrook a shot.
There's no way you work in this field if you honestly think the deficiencies in these two trials are remotely comparable.

I appreciate your concern for my sensibilities, they aren't that delicate. This appears to be another case of "the seriousness of the charge is what counts, not the truth behind it." If your going to make such a serious accusation, you really should have something better then "they KNEW what they were doing was wrong."

If you need me to repeat myself again, let me know.

05-09-2005, 11:24 AM	#21 (permalink)
matthew330 Banned	No they didn't inject them, in a nutshell, violations of the Tuskegee Syphillis trial included the following: -Informed consent was never obtained - not to mention they were coerced by being offered free physical exams, rides to and from clinics, hot meals on exam days, and burial stipends of $50.00 -No formal protocol ever existed -The men were never told they had "syphilis" -Treatment for syphilis was never given (though they were promised treatment for "bad blood") -Treatment was denied even after penicillin was discovered in the 1940's The results: -28 dead of syphilis -100 dead of related complications -40 wives infected -19 children born with congenital syphilis The above mentioned trial has already been compared to Nazi war crimes which led to the first of the major ethical guidlines for human subjects research (The nuremberg code). The Tuskegee trial led to the third (The Belmont Report). These are some of the most notorious voliations of ethics in research, which led to massive overhauls in the way trials were conducted. There is only a question in the above mentioned trial of whether or not the investigators should have insured independent advocates were acting in the participants behalf. They did give assent to the study, as required by law. So you've tried Nazi Germany, tried Tuskegee, go ahead and give Willowbrook a shot. There's no way you work in this field if you honestly think the deficiencies in these two trials are remotely comparable. I appreciate your concern for my sensibilities, they aren't that delicate. This appears to be another case of "the seriousness of the charge is what counts, not the truth behind it." If your going to make such a serious accusation, you really should have something better then "they KNEW what they were doing was wrong." If you need me to repeat myself again, let me know.