Transcription

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9 The S cientiftc Endeavor The S cientiftc Endeavor In the case of animal subjects used in research, proposed projects must be approved by institutional review boards, as discussed above. Additionally, there are rules for the care of the animals, such as housing requirements, veterinary oversight, and how animals are to be obtained. There is a heated debate concerning the ethical issue of whether scientists should use animals in research at all. The moral dimensions of the debate are beyond the scope of this book, 128 but from a practical point of view, animal research has greatly improved human and animal health and the general scientific understanding of biological phenomena.129 There is debate as to the implications of using results from unethically conducted research. An extreme example of this problem is a study of the effects of cold water on humans conducted on Nazi concentration camp victims during World War IL Hundreds of men were submerged in cold water for extended periods of time and monitored to determine the most effective means of warming bodies after exposure and also to determine the body temperature at which death occurs. Many of the subjects died during the tests which apparently was the intention of the researchers.13 While acknowledging the horrendous nature of these experiments, the question arises as to whether or not the results should be used by subsequent researchers on the subject. On the one hand, the vic 's vile deaths might have provided information which could be used to save other lives and thus have provided some benefit to humankind. On the other hand, use of the concentration camp research results m1.ght be interpreted as condoning unethical research and thus indirectly encouraging it. The New England Journal of Medicine, for example, has taken the latter position and states that it will not publish the results of any unethically conducted studies.13 1 Such a stance extends the scientific norm of universalism, discussed m Chapter 4. Universalism is the idea that scientists are to be judged only by their competence as scientists and such judging should include not only the competence of the scientist in conducting rigorous research, but ethical research as well. 5.5 Whistleblowing All scientists have a responsibility to!illll1le the existence of scientific misconduct. If a scientist knows with certainty that unethical behavior has occurred, there is an obligation to report such information to the community of scientists. Unfortunately, such reporting, or whist/eb!owing, is very difficult for all concemed.132 Whistleblowers are ofren subjected to professional attacks by individuals who are threatened by the accusations. This can include the accused scientist as well as those who fear the bad publicity for a laboratory, university, or funding agency. For example, Robert Sprague, who blew the whistle on Stephen Bruening, as discussed earlier in this chapter, found himself under investi ga tion and subjected to what many would consider professional attacks.13 3 If serious misconduct occurs, it is the ethical responsibility of scientists to blow the whistle. However, it should be done very i:autiously and carefully, and junior scientists or students should seek the support of senior scientists before proceeding with the reporting. Whistleblowing itself is unethical when done for reasons other than matters of research integrity; it is not to be used to make trouble for personal enemies.134 Proper ethical practice is as important as any other aspect of scientific research. In fact, scientific misconduct can turn an otherwise brilliant piece of research into one that harms the quest for knowledge. Scientists have a moral obli ga tion to not let this happen.

10