title: Herbal medicine research and global health: an ethical analysis.
abstract: Governments, international agencies and corporations are increasingly investing in traditional herbal medicine research. Yet little literature addresses ethical challenges in this research. In this paper, we apply concepts in a comprehensive ethical framework for clinical research to international traditional herbal medicine research. We examine in detail three key, underappreciated dimensions of the ethical framework in which particularly difficult questions arise for international herbal medicine research: social value, scientific validity and favourable risk-benefit ratio. Significant challenges exist in determining shared concepts of social value, scientific validity and favourable risk-benefit ratio across international research collaborations. However, we argue that collaborative partnership, including democratic deliberation, offers the context and process by which many of the ethical challenges in international herbal medicine research can, and should be, resolved. By "cross-training" investigators, and investing in safety-monitoring infrastructure, the issues identified by this comprehensive framework can promote ethically sound international herbal medicine research that contributes to global health.
authors.affiliation: Department of Clinical Bioethics, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, United States of America. jontilburt@yahoo.com
authors.forename: Jon C
authors.initials: JC
authors.lastname: Tilburt
authors.forename: Ted J
authors.initials: TJ
authors.lastname: Kaptchuk
mesh_terms: D035843:Biomedical Research / Q000941:ethics* / Q000379:methods / Q000458:organization & administration; D003299:Cooperative Behavior; D003469:Culture; D003659:Decision Making, Organizational; D032984:Ethics, Research; D014943:Global Health; D029001:Herbal Medicine; D006801:Humans; D038622:Internationality; D008519:Medicine, Traditional; D009938:Organizations; D011057:Politics; D011634:Public Health / Q000941:ethics*; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D012107:Research Design; D018570:Risk Assessment; D012945:Social Values / Q000208:ethnology
references.citation: J Clin Epidemiol. 2001 Jun;54(6):541-9
references.pmid: 11377113
references.citation: JAMA. 2004 Feb 4;291(5):599-604
references.pmid: 14762039
references.citation: Pharmacol Ther. 2000 May;86(2):191-8
references.pmid: 10799714
references.citation: Ann Intern Med. 2006 Mar 7;144(5):364-7
references.pmid: 16520478
references.citation: Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2001 Dec;70(6):497-504
references.pmid: 11753265
references.citation: Hypertension. 2006 Nov;48(5):838-45
references.pmid: 17015784
references.citation: J Altern Complement Med. 2005 Dec;11(6):1005-13
references.pmid: 16398591
references.citation: N Engl J Med. 2005 Jul 28;353(4):341-8
references.pmid: 16049208
references.citation: Am J Chin Med. 2005;33(6):897-902
references.pmid: 16355446
references.citation: Monash Bioeth Rev. 2005 Jul;24(3):52-60
references.pmid: 16302320
references.citation: Perspect Biol Med. 2002 Summer;45(3):395-415
references.pmid: 12114833
references.citation: J Epidemiol Community Health. 2001 Oct;55(10):762-5
references.pmid: 11553662
references.citation: J Intern Med. 2002 Aug;252(2):107-13
references.pmid: 12190885
references.citation: Dev World Bioeth. 2007 Apr;7(1):25-34
references.pmid: 17355329
references.citation: J Infect Dis. 2004 Mar 1;189(5):930-7
references.pmid: 14976611
references.citation: Toxicol Pathol. 2006;34(4):319-26
references.pmid: 16787890
references.citation: BMJ. 2004 Nov 13;329(7475):1156-9
references.pmid: 15539672
references.citation: JAMA. 1998 Nov 11;280(18):1585-9
references.pmid: 9820260