Is 'best proven' a useless criterion?
In this article, I examine some proposals for modification of ethical documents regulating research, particularly, the problems that introducing certain economic clauses may pose. I evaluate suggestions that reject the notion of providing the 'best proven diagnostic and therapeutic method' in favor of 'the highest attainable therapeutic method' or 'the proven effective prophylactic, diagnostic and therapeutic methods.' I analyze the plausibility and problems of introducing a double standard and the consequences it may have in developing countries. Finally I highlight the impact these changes may imply for these countries.
Luna
F
F
Ugarteche 3050 4 87, Capital Federal (1425), Argentina. florluna@pccp.com.ar
D002986:Clinical Trials as Topic / Q000191:economics / Q000592:standards*; D035061:Control Groups; D003906:Developing Countries; D028781:Ethical Relativism; D032984:Ethics, Research; D006297:Health Services Accessibility; D006381:Helsinki Declaration; D006805:Human Experimentation / Q000191:economics; D006801:Humans; D038622:Internationality; D012107:Research Design / Q000592:standards; D035842:Research Subjects; D012935:Social Justice; D012959:Socioeconomic Factors