Morality and Science; Know the Standards and Scandals of Science Based Information - and buy E.coli.

In an afternoon lecture regarding ethical issues involved in research, I had a thought.... ( pause for thinking faces below)

Sometimes we need to go to Chicago to think about morality and science

how does science know about ethics? To consider what is ethical requires some moral code to reference.

To make a moral code, there needs to be some idea of what is good.

So...science (which I am a part of) what is good? What is Bad? What type of scandals occur behind the scenes that may have minor to severe implications, such as vitamin or drug recommendations. Could this help to explain fluctuating nutritional recomendations that flood the market and why I eat chocolate, don't eat chocolate, drink wine, take calcium then don't for fear of aggressive prostate cancer...then remember I don't have a prostate... it can all become very confusing for the consumer (me included) - but you SHOULD be supplementing with vitamin D!! There is significant evidence that most of us are deficient (aim for around 400-500IU per day - although most supplements that I find are at least 1,000 IU , I don't have an answer for you on that, I take one every other day) - - remember this is a fat soluble vitamin which means your body does not excrete it as readily as water soluble vitamins (like the B vitamins)  - - this means toxicity in high doses can be an issue and that one may argue that absorption is better if consumed with food containing some fat content.

  AND

Science, how is that moral code working out for you?

The Moral Parameters of Scientists. 

Within the blue bubble are some things that scientists/health care professionals/researchers try to avoid. 

To get rid of these sins-of-science, very strict parameters and systems have been made (yellow box).  

(for more information on what the above are click here - Hippocratic Oath, HIPAA, IRB)

Dishonesty 

• skewing data
•  Fabricating Data
• Plagiarizing colleague's data
• doctors choosing their career or path based on financial reasons (this is ridiculous unless pursing plastic surgery - cost of schooling plus the cost of malpractice insurance means choosing to be a physician on the basis of money is a complete fallacy)
• bias when reporting information and so on. 

Coercion

• $$ still makes the world go-round.
• FUNDING (this is vital) - if you have read a study lately, look at who funds it an be weary that if coercion or dishonesty have entered the picture, the results may point to favorable findings based on where the money comes from.

• The ADA (American Dietetics Association) - - - see other blog. I was APPALLED to see who was funding the group that claims to be "nutrition experts" - - a HUGE loss of credibility in my eyes....(interested yet!)...quackery but more about that in a later post...

Pause for commercial break -- See what our readers are doing:

Be a Hero - Become a Marrow Donor:   

 For more information contact Gina Cousineau ginacinsc@me.com

check out the website of one of our readers: http://lookville.com/

 
Bias

• Maintaining objectivity is not always done-- if researchers want an outcome, they know how to work the numbers to achieve that outcome, the question is, do they value results or morality/integrity more?
• Who is studied in these trials that yield results that impact our public health programs and recommendations?  - - have you ever considered that the people in a test population are not a very good representation of the truth or even lack generalization to the general population. 

Inequality of Treatment

•  Per-say a researcher is thrilled about a new screening method and gives certain cases much  more attention than others. This "preferential bias" will inaccurately overestimate the results of a study.

• Perhaps subjects were chosen on the basis that they would provide the results of interest

 Invasion of Privacy (In a more clinical aspect of things)

• HIPAA - - patient confidentiality. Nothing is supposed to be shared outside of specific parameters. 
• In a research setting - - often identifiable information is separated from the specimen being used or turned into a code with the key locked and monitored by a third party

 BUT WHO CARES IF THEY LIE, OR TALK ABOUT A PATIENT'S HEMORRHOIDS IN THE ELEVATOR OR FABRICATE RESULTS OR FRAME QUESTIONS TO GET STUDY SUBJECTS TO ANSWER FAVORABLY......who will stop these rogue scientists?


One thing that the moral laws of science is lacking is accountability. What omniscient review board or group can get into the minds of and convict those to want to maintain integrity? And to make a full circle - -what is integrity without morality?

Just some food for thought =) As a Take Home - beware of what you hear/read and choose to believe. Even in science and medicine, never trust blindly. 

BUT guess who is back in full-force..... little e.coli ! and she is spreading to others.... ( pun very much intended)

 

Cousin Sarah With her very own e.coli......

Natural Habitat

 You might not believe it but...you also can get your very own E.coli right HERE
 
 d