title: Some observations on informed consent in non-therapeutic research.
abstract: The quality of the consent obtained from 41 volunteer subjects in eight experiments is evaluated. Five subjects (all physicians) gave informed consent; 22 subjects gave partially informed consent; and 14 subjects merely gave consent. It is argued that 'informed' consent is obtainable only from medically trained people, and that lip service to this concept in laymen should cease. The concept of medical competence should instead be introduced and a personal medical referee appointed to adjudicate on behalf of the volunteer.
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D001241:Aspirin / Q000008:administration & dosage / Q000009:adverse effects; D002986:Clinical Trials as Topic; D032781:Codes of Ethics; D030881:Disclosure; D004341:Drug Evaluation; D028744:Ethics Committees, Research; D004992:Ethics, Medical; D005260:Female; D005860:Germany, West; D006281:Health Occupations; D006381:Helsinki Declaration; D006805:Human Experimentation; D006801:Humans; D007258:Informed Consent; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D033281:Nontherapeutic Human Experimentation; D009790:Occupations; D011803:Quinine / Q000008:administration & dosage / Q000009:adverse effects; D018570:Risk Assessment; D013411:Sulfadiazine / Q000008:administration & dosage / Q000009:adverse effects; D013557:Switzerland; D006113:United Kingdom
chemical_list: D013411:Sulfadiazine; D011803:Quinine; D001241:Aspirin