Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Journals
  3. Politics and the Life Sciences
  4. Volume 13
Journal Home
Refine listing

Refine listing

Access:
Publication date:

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×
< Back to all issues

Volume 13 - February 1994

Contents

Page 3 of 6

Symposium: Paternal-Fetal Conflict

Symposium: Bioethics and Public Policy

Symposium: Paternal-Fetal Conflict

Continuing Dialogue: Dual-Use Toxins

  • A Fourth Option for Limiting the Warfare Potential of Medically Useful Toxins

  • Zsolt P. Harsanyi
  • Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    17 May 2016, pp. 265-266

  • There is a growing field of medicine today that can be referred to as “therapeutic toxins,” an apparent oxymoron. Substances that are normally thought of as toxins are finding increasing use as therapeutic medicinals. It is this increasing use of toxins in medicine that Jonathan Tucker has raised as an important issue in a recent article in Politics and the Life Sciences (1994).

Symposium: Bioethics and Public Policy

Continuing Dialogue: Dual-Use Toxins

  • Prophylactic Defenses against Toxin Weapons: A Double-Edged Shield

  • Jonathan B. Tucker
  • Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    17 May 2016, pp. 266-269

  • The term “dual-use” toxins refers to a number of naturally occurring poisons that are finding increasing application in medical therapeutics and biomedical research but also have the potential for misuse as weapons of war and terrorism. Dr. Harsanyi's thought-provoking critique of my recent article on dual-use toxins deserves a detailed response. First, I apologize for quoting him out of context. In my defense, however, his referenced article (Harsanyi, 1992) does not make a clear distinction between the potential diversion of dual-use toxins by the intended customers—physicians and research scientists—or by toxin manufacturers. It is a subset of the latter, of course, that pose the greatest risk with respect to the potential misuse of toxins for nefarious purposes.

Symposium: Bioethics and Public Policy

Profile

  • Office for Protection from Research Risks (OPRR)

  • Gary B. Ellis
  • Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    17 May 2016, pp. 271-273

  • The Office for Protection from Research Risks (OPRR) has primary responsibility within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) for developing and implementing policies, procedures, and regulations for the protection of human subjects involved in research. It also has primary responsibility within the U.S. Public Health Service for developing and implementing policies and procedures for the care and use of laboratory animals. And, it has responsibility for coordinating the development and implementation of policies, procedures, and regulations for the protection of human subjects involved in research for all U.S. federal departments and agencies that conduct or support such research.

Symposium: Bioethics and Public Policy

Conference Report

Symposium Response

Symposium: The Duality of Human Nature

Roundtable Review

Symposium: The Duality of Human Nature

Roundtable Review

Review of James Q. Wilson, The Moral Sense

Roundtable Review

Symposium: The Duality of Human Nature

Symposium Response

Review of James Q. Wilson, The Moral Sense

Roundtable Review

Page 3 of 6