Ethics In Science

ETHICS IN SCIENCE  ETHICS  ETHICS

IN SCIENCE

IN SCIENCE



ETHICS IN SCIENCE



Ethics in Science

Doctors draft priority list for no care during pandemic 

People older than 85.



Those with severe trauma, which could include critical injuries from car crashes and shootings.



Severely burned patients older than 60.



Those with severe mental impairment, which could include advanced Alzheimer's disease.



Those with a severe chronic disease, such as advanced heart failure, lung disease or poorly controlled diabetes.

Many Scientists Admit to Misconduct 

Few scientists fabricate results from scratch or flatly plagiarize the work of others, but a surprising number engage in troubling degrees of fact-bending or deceit, according to the first large-scale survey of scientific misbehavior.



More than 5 percent of scientists answering a confidential questionnaire admitted to having tossed out data because the information contradicted their previous research or said they had circumvented some human research protections.

Definition 

Ethics is the accommodation of the “me” with the “them”



Ethics is the optimization of individual activity within Society

Ethical Standards – Whom Do They Serve? 

Research Ethics – protects the study patient or subject, or the community



Ethics of Scientific Practice – protects the “integrity” of the scientific process

Why Does Scientific Misconduct Matter? 

Morally wrong



Waste of resources



Potentially harmful



Erodes public confidence



Endangers independence of science

Cardinal Sins of Ethical Conduct of Science 

Falsification



Fabrication



Plagiarism

Fabrication and Falsification  Danger

to Science

 Undermines

integrity  Conclusions not justified  Unjustified career advancement  Violates moral precepts  Removes incentive

Bias More Common Than Lying (bias=lying?) 

“Intended Effect” – likely to find the effect or outcome you “intend” to find



Scientific measures to guard against bias – but hardly foolproof



Pressure for “best available care” may limit repeat of trials, but the essential element of scientific method is reproducibility

Plagiarism 

Danger to Science  Misallocation

of credit  Unnecessary publications  Thievery and lying  Integrity and character of scientist questioned

Social Pressures for Misconduct and Bias 

Publication and career advancement pressures  Funding pressures  Mentor pressures  Unreasonable expectations

Create Social Conditions Favoring Ethical Behavior 

Mentor models good behavior  Mentor spends time with trainee  Mentor does not exert unreasonable pressure for productivity  Promotion not based upon number of papers  Contrary views more accepted  Integrity needs to be nurtured

The Ethical Question 

The ethical question is one of individual behavior with respect to the social structure



An isolated person has no need for ethics

Ethics is Utilitarian 

The ethical question asks,”does it work?”



“does it work” implies pragmatism and utilitarianism; i.e.,is the ethical decision realistic and useful

Origin of ethics 

Ethics arises out of competition between individual values within a society  Values are what is important to the individual  Groups have no values per se. The values of a group is a compromise taken over the values of group members

Ethical Choices of the Scienctist 

What is an ethical choice?  What is an ethical goal?  Can one have non-ethical choices and an ethical goal? This is Sophie’s Choice  Can one have ethical choices and a nonethical goal? Means justify the ends

Sophie’s Choice Her choice, Sophie’s choice given to her by a Nazi medical doctor was to choose which of her children dies in concentration camp gas chamber

Choice Definition 

Choice is the path one takes to the goal  There are multiple paths  The are multiple goals some patent, some recondite  Ethical responsibility and choice are a canonical couple

Game of Choices Choices

start

finish

Ignorance of a Choice or Goal is no Excuse      

List and know all possible choices both ethical and non-ethical List and know consequences of Choice Know the goal or goals List and know consequences of obtaining or not obtaining goal Make choice Take responsibility for choice

Limitation of free Choice 



Choices are limited by perception

If I see an armed man receiving money from another, am I perceiving a robbery or am I perceiving Brink’s officer taking money off to a vault?  Taking action on the former perception especially If I’m armed could be a disaster

Guidelines        

Honesty Careful experimental technique Non-manipulation treatment of data Continual development of knowledge and skills Willing to change hypothesis in face of new evidence Willing to challenge ones hypothesis through falsification Avoids intimidation, rhetoric, propaganda, and misrepresentation Does not appeal to authority

Guidelines          

Recognizes the consequence of ones research Communicates through peer reviewed journals of meetings Need to unify disparate data Forms hypothesis consistent with existing body of knowledge Avoids conflict of interest Provides experimental details so work is reproducible by others skilled in the art Assigns credit where credit is due Does not falsify or manipulates data Does not plagiarize works of others or claims as own Socially aware

Case histories 

You are a graduate student working for a leading astronomer. Your job is to use a sophisticated radio telescope the astronomer designed for observing variable radio sources in the universe. After several weeks of analyzing data, you realize you have discovered a totally new kind of star -- one that provides evidence for the origin of the universe. Your boss congratulates you for your fine work, writes a major report on it, and wins a Nobel Prize. What should you do?

Case histories Being Scooped by Your Own Work 

You are a young scientist who recently sent a paper based on your research in adolescent anorexia to an important scientific journal to be considered for publication. As is the custom, the journal's editor sends the paper out for review to other experts in the field. After several weeks he returns the paper to you, rejecting it because he claims that its reviewers found that "it contains several major errors and misinterpretations." Then, several months later, in another journal you find an article containing data almost identical to your own, and using sentences and descriptions similar to yours. What should you do?

Case histories A "Doctored" Doctorate? 

You are a graduate student working on a Ph.D. in chemistry at a prestigious university. A good friend of yours who is a graduate student in the same lab reveals to you that he hasn't done all the experiments he said he did, and that a substantial part of his data has been doctored to make it look like it is based on original work. What should you do?

Case histories Preempting Theft 

A scientist doing research on sickle cell disease finds a way to produce a chemical from genetically changed mice that reduces the symptoms of sickle cell disease in many of its victims. Because he recognizes that he could earn a lot of money if the chemical is produced commercially, he does not want to reveal some of the details of the procedure for production. He submits a paper for publication in which he deliberately includes an incorrect gene sequences. The paper is well written and plausible, and unless the referees attempt to clone the gene themselves, they would have no way of knowing of the deliberate error. When the paper is accepted for publication, the scientist will correct the error. Is the scientist justified in misrepresenting his data? --What if he withholds the proper sequence from the final publication?

Case histories Editorial Responsibility You are editor of a prestigious scientific journal that is respected around the world for its timely, accurate reporting. A story is "leaked" to you by a confidential source that provides strong evidence that a major scientist working on HIV (the AIDS virus) has reported false data in his experiments. What should you do?

Case histories Science for Whom? 

You are a scientist at a major university who has discovered a chemical broth that makes it easy to grow the virus that causes AIDS in a laboratory flask. What will you do? --share the recipe immediately with all laboratories that need it for AIDS research? --or publish first? --or solicit offers from pharmaceutical companies who might want to market the broth?

Case histories Using Nazi Data 





During the early part of World War II the Nazi's lost many pilots during the Battle of Britain in the icy waters of the English Channel. On land large numbers of Germans froze on the Russian front. The Nazi's decided to start cold experiments at Dachau concentration camp in mid-August of 1942. They conducted about 400 different experiments using approximately 300 prisoners. The experiments involved leaving the people in vats of icy water for hours or in the freezing outdoors. The Nazi's measured their changes in blood, urine, spinal fluid, muscle reflexes, heart action and body temperature.

Case histories Using Nazi Data 



When the patients' temperatures dropped below 79.7 degrees F, various ways of rewarming were tried. Rapid rewarming proved most effective. Slow rewarming was not very effective and alcohol actually hastened cooling. Up to 100 prisoners died during these experiments. Approximately 1000 people die of exposure to cold in the U.S. every year. No current data is available as complete or as accurate as that of the Nazi's. It was determined that the Nazi method of rapid rewarming in hot water be used as the treatment of choice by the Air-Sea Rescue Services of the U.S. Armed Forces.

Case histories Renegade Research? 



Thomas Creighton, a 33-year-old mechanic, was dying of heart disease. The surgeons at the University of Arizona performed a heart transplant on him, but the new heart was rejected. Instead of waiting two hours to use the approved Jarvik-7 artificial heart, they implanted an unauthorized artificial heart.

Case histories Renegade Research? 





Two hours after the surgery, the doctors removed the artificial heart and implanted a second human heart. This second heart transplant also failed. Mr. Creighton died forty-six hours after the first surgery. The Food and Drug Administration investigated, but took no action against the surgeons involved. If the doctors were found guilty of performing an unauthorized experiment on a patient, what action should be taken against them? Would the action be the same if the patient had not died?

Case histories To Medicate or Not to Medicate 



Terry Kelly received a National Institute of Mental Health grant for research in the Western Tropics. As part of her personal gear, she took along a considerable amount of medication, which her physician had prescribed for use, should Kelly find herself in an active malaria region. Later, after settling into a village, Kelly became aware that many of the local people were quite ill with malaria. Kelly's Dilemma: Since she had such a large supply of medication, much more than she needed for her personal use, should she distribute the surplus to her hosts?

Case histories To Medicate or Not to Medicate 

Kelly's Decision



Kelly decided not to give any medication to the villagers who were exhibiting symptoms of malaria, even though she had a considerable surplus in her personal supply. She reasoned that since the medication did not confer permanent immunity to the disease and because she would not be present to provide medication during future outbreaks of the disease, it was more important to allow affected villagers to develop their own resistance to malaria "naturally.

Case histories INDUSTRIAL SPONSORSHIP OF ACADEMIC RESEARCH 

Sandra was excited about being accepted as a graduate student in the laboratory of Dr. Frederick, a leading scholar in the field, and she embarked on her assigned research project eagerly. But after a few months she began to have misgivings. Though part of Dr. Frederick's work was supported by federal grants, the project on which she was working was totally supported by a grant from a single company..

Case histories INDUSTRIAL SPONSORSHIP OF ACADEMIC RESEARCH 

Sandra had known this before coming to the lab and had not thought it would be a problem. But she had not known that Dr. Frederick also had a major consulting agreement with the company. She also heard from other graduate students that when it came time to publish her work, any paper would be subject to review by the company to determine if any of her work was patentable

Case histories A CONFLICT OF INTEREST 

John, a third-year graduate student, is participating in a department-wide seminar where students, post-docs, and faculty members discuss work in progress. An assistant professor prefaces her comments by saying that the work she is about to discuss is sponsored by both a federal grant and a biotechnology firm for which she consults. In the course of the talk John realizes that he has been working on a technique that could make a major contribution to the work being discussed. But his faculty advisor consults for a different, and competing, biotechnology firm.

Case histories The Selection of Data 

Deborah, a third-year graduate student, and Kathleen, a postdoc, have made a series of measurements on a new experimental semiconductor material using an expensive neutron source at a national laboratory. When they get back to their own laboratory and examine the data, they get the following data points. A newly proposed theory predicts results indicated by the curve.

Case histories The Selection of Data 

During the measurements at the national laboratory, Deborah and Kathleen observed that there were power fluctuations they could not control or predict. Furthermore, they discussed their work with another group doing similar experiments, and they knew that the other group had gotten results confirming the theoretical prediction and was writing a manuscript describing their results.

A Selection of Data

Case histories The Selection of Data 

In writing up their own results for publication, Kathleen suggests dropping the two anomalous data points near the abscissa (the solid squares) from the published graph and from a statistical analysis. She proposes that the existence of the data points be mentioned in the paper as possibly due to power fluctuations and being outside the expected standard deviation calculated from the remaining data points. "These two runs," she argues to Deborah, "were obviously wrong."

Groups and Individuals 

Groups are not creative



Groups provide resources



Groups invest in individuals seeking a return on the investment both fiscally and culturally

Reward 

Individuals are seldom rewarded by the group in true proportion to their contribution  The group most of the time doesn’t understand the investment and generally undervalues it and over values the group contribution

Edison 

Thomas Alva Edison’s greatest invention was not the phonograph, or light bulb,or Edison effect (which he did not understand or appreciate) or the multiplexed stock ticker. His greatest contribution was the modern research organization  Edison founded General Electric and their famous Knolls laboratory

Thomas Alva Edison

Modern Research Laboratory (MRL) 

  

MRL resembles the pre-renaissance world in that the individual is less important than the team Individual expression is suspect and subsumed by team expression Team player trumps the individual player MRL occurs both in the academic and business worlds

Entrepreneurship 

In opposition to the Edison model for Research is Entrepreneurship



Entrepreneurship is an attempt by the individual to obtain a larger”piece of the pie”

Ethics of Science 

Below is a list of ethical guidelines  We shall take these guidelines and apply them to case histories  We shall examine the whether guidelines 

Work in a modern research laboratory

Application of Guidelines to MRL     

Most patents written today are not full or honest disclosures. SOP Many MRL’s do not patent but keep information as trade secrets Claims form any drugs’ effectiveness overstated; e.g., vitamins Often electronic products introduced into market with the intension to allow the end-user identify the “bugs” MRL makes little provisions for scientist to keep up with new knowledge

Application of Guidelines to MRL  





MRL are authority based MRL make few real world provisions to reward inventors Frequently inventions are appropriated by others allowing the court to decide ownership TB, Japan 80% of patents and publication are fabrications

Modern Values 

Modern science, Modern art, and modern society arose when individual values were recognized as valid and not subservient to the group  Group science and group art is dreadful, political, and programmatic  Only individuals are creative. Society benefits from individual creativity

Pre-Renaissance 

during the pre-renaissance, the social structure, the church, or state claimed hegemony over the individual. Such things happen today in totalitarian states