Tuskegee Syphilis Study and Johns Hopkins Lead Paint - Essay Example

Tuskegee Syphillis study and Johns Hopkins lead paint research So many researches are going on in the field of medical science in order to find out solutions for preventing some epidemic diseases. In most of the cases, researchers often inform the subjects or the patients about the nature of their study and the intentions or objectives of the research. Since some patients do not like to reveal their private details to others, it is morally and legally wrong to conduct a medical rese4aches without taking the consent of the subjects. However, there are many cases reported in the past in which the researchers deliberately mislead the subjects in order to get more reliable data from them. Tuskegee Syphillis study and Johns Hopkins lead paint research are some of the controversial medical researches conducted in the past without taking permission from the subjects. This paper critically analyses these two studies. Tuskegee Syphillis study was arguably the most infamous medical study conducted in the history of American medical science. This controversial clinical study was conducted over a period of 40 years, between 1932 and 1972. It was conducted by American public health department at Alabama to learn more about the spreading of syphilis disease among poor people. This study became controversial since the authorities hide the actual objectives of this study from the subjects. The patients thought that they may get free treatments from the government and cooperated fully with the researchers. By the time the study was exposed in 1972 and ended on November 16th of the same year, 28 men had died of syphilis, 100 others were dead due to syphilis related complications, at least 40 wives had been infected and 19 children had contracted the disease at birth. On July 23rd, eight months after the Tuskegee syphilis study was abandoned, a $1.8 billion class action suit was filed against the institutions and individuals involved. Prominent civil rights lawyer, Fred Gray, demanded $3 million in damages for each living participant and the heirs of the deceased. The case, however, never came to trial and in December 1974 and out of court settlement was made. The government agreed to the distribution of $10 million, whereby each survivor received $37,500 in damages and the heirs of the deceased received $15,000 (Tuskegee Syphilis Study) Johns Hopkins lead paint research was another controversial medical research which was identical to the Tuskegee Syphillis study. It was conducted in the world famous John Hopkins University in 1990’s to test “how well different levels of repair in Baltimore rental housing worked to reduce lead in the blood of inner-city children”(Lewin). This study became controversial following the death of a healthy young volunteer in June 2001. The John Hopkins University researchers failed to warn the subjects about the possible threats of this study and the danger this study could cause to the subjects. This study forced healthy children to live in potentially dangerous housing and many of the children who were utilized by the researchers later developed health problems like asthma, lung diseases, breathing problems etc. The researchers argued that they have taken the consent of the parents for using their children for this study. However, it should be noted that “neither researchers nor parents, have the legal right to put healthy children into a study that offers them no benefit and carries real hazards. Children who ingest lead can suffer brain damage” (Lewin). The study, which ran from 1993 to 1995, was conducted in 100 homes contaminated with lead paint. In Baltimore city more than 100000 homes have lead paint and over 4000 children annually test positive for raised serum lead levels. The aim of the study was to find a cheaper and less hazardous way of removing lead paint than stripping the paint off the walls. The work was funded largely by a government grant (Josefson) In both of the above mentioned medical research cases, the researchers never bothered much in taking the consent of the subjects. Tuskegee Syphillis study was conducted among adults whereas the Johns Hopkins lead paint research was conducted among the children. In the first case (Tuskegee Syphillis study) the researchers spread false information about the study in order to convince the adult subjects. In the second case (Johns Hopkins lead paint research), the researchers took the consent of the parents and never bothered to take the consent of the children. Both the studies are clear violations of human rights. In the first case, the researchers did nothing to help the patients even though the patients thought that the study may bring free treatments to them. Poor syphilis patients who were utilized by the researchers never bothered much to seek the help of expensive medical treatment, since they thought that the researchers may provide them the required treatment. The researchers on the other hand, continued their data collection even though the subjects died one after other because of the absence of any medical treatment. In other words, the researchers cheated the poor patients and they played with the lives of the poor patients. Before the study was initiated more out of the 600 subjects taken, 201 subjects were without the disease. The researchers offered free medical care, meals, and free burial insurance to all of them without revealing the fact that they are either victims or subjects of syphilis study. Instead of revealing the truth, the researchers told the subjects that they are providing treatment not for syphilis, but for bad blood. The second study involves more ethical dimensions than the first study. Here instead of using adults as subjects, the researchers in John Hopkins University used children as the subjects. In many cases, it is a fact that parents can take decisions upon the future of their children before they become adults. However, parents do not have the right to play with the lives of their children under any circumstances. Since life is an irreversible thing once it is lost, nobody can play with it. Before taking consent from a subject for a medical research, it is the duty of the researcher to explain all the positives and negative consequences, the study may bring to the subject. However, neither John Hopkins researchers nor the Tuskegee Syphillis researchers were too much worried about such things. Two mothers later filed negligence lawsuits against the Kennedy Krieger Institute, an affiliate of Johns Hopkins, saying that the research institute had failed to warn them about the risks of the study and the danger that their children could be poisoned by lead in the houses (Lewin). To conclude, medical researches should be conducted only after taking the consent of the subjects if it involves human subjects. It is the duty of the researchers to reveal all the possible positive and negative benefits such studies can bring to the subjects and the rest of the world. Human life is the most important thing in this universe and it is unethical, illogical and illegal to use such valuable lives for experimental purposes. No science or technology so far succeeded in creating an artificial life form in a laboratory setup. In other words, the secrets behind life are still unknown to us. Under such circumstances, nobody has the right to engage in activities which may cause damages to human life. In short, medical researches conducted upon humans should be avoided, if possible; if it is unavoidable, the researchers should take consent of the subjects first after explaining the advantages and drawbacks such researches may provide to the subject. . Works Cited 1. Josefson, Deborah. “Johns Hopkins Faces Further Criticism Over Experiments”. Web. 11 July 2011. 2. Lewin, Tamar. “U.S. Investigating Johns Hopkins Study of Lead Paint Hazard”. 2001. The New York Times. August 24, 2001. Web. 11 July 2011 3. “Tuskegee Syphilis Study”. Web. 11 July 2011. Read More