Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T19:42:58.329Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Guidelines to Prevent Malevolent Use of Biomedical Research

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 August 2006

SHANE K. GREEN
Affiliation:
American Medical Association's Institute for Ethics and the Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs of the American Medical Association American Medical Association's Institute for Ethics, the Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs
SARA TAUB
Affiliation:
American Medical Association's Institute for Ethics and the Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs of the American Medical Association American Medical Association's Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs
KARINE MORIN
Affiliation:
American Medical Association's Institute for Ethics and the Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs of the American Medical Association Ethics Standards Group of the American Medical Association, and the Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs
DANIEL HIGGINSON
Affiliation:
American Medical Association's Institute for Ethics and the Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs of the American Medical Association Ethics Standards Group of the American Medical Association, and the Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs

Extract

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 (NAS) 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.The Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs of the American Medical Association (AMA) formulates ethical policies for the medical profession through its interpretations of the AMA's Principles of Medical Ethics. The Council at the time this report was adopted consisted of Michael S. Goldrich, M.D. (Chair); Priscilla Ray, M.D. (Vice-Chair); Regina M. Benjamin, M.D., M.B.A.; Daniel Higginson (student member); Mark A. Levine, M.D.; John M. O'Bannon III, M.D.; Robert M. Sade, M.D.; Monique A. Spillman, M.D., Ph.D. (resident member); and Dudley M. Stewart, Jr., M.D. Staff to the Council at the time the report was adopted were Audiey Kao, M.D., Ph.D. (Vice President, Ethics Standards Group); Karine Morin, L.L.M. (Secretary); and Sara Taub, M.Be. Shane K. Green, Ph.D., was a Fellow in the AMA's Institute for Ethics.

Type
SPECIAL SECTION: BIOETHICS AND WAR
Copyright
© 2006 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)