Unnatural justice: Public allegations could cause significant harm to vital clinical trial activity
In this thought-provoking post, Nik Zeps (a consultant with AHRECS and a partner at Chrysalis) discusses the serious harm (in terms of reputation and career, as well as lost useful lines of inquiry) when there are complaints that allege ethical problems with clinical research.
These relate to situations where the clinical research is evaluating different kinds of intervention, where the evidence for the ‘accepted’ treatment might not be clear.
A misunderstanding of such research designs and a visceral reaction to apparent breaches aren’t helpful.
When such allegations are made, the researchers are rarely afforded an opportunity to respond and explain. If they were, one assumes that the manner could be easily cleared up.
We are embarrassed to admit in our own reporting of the cited case we really didn’t grasp the realities of what occurred or called out the very emotive reaction.
Regulation of human epigenetic editing: ensuring international frameworks for governing Human Genome Editing don’t impede vital medical research
In this thoughtful post, Nik Zeps reflects on human genome manipulation in medical research, the ethical guidance in Australia and internationally.
He discusses CRISPR and the furore in 2018 around the ‘genetically modified babies’ in China.
Nik then discusses the degree to which the COVID-19 pandemic has pushed discussions about human genetic manipulation off the media radar.
Nevertheless, there have been important international discussions about the topic, including a new WHO Framework. This topic was recently discussed in a paper by Zeps, Lysaght et al. 2021.
The situation might position the WHO as a major player in the international discussion about human genetic manipulation.
Embedding clinical research as part of routine healthcare: Managing the potential for competing interests. (UPDATED).
Nik Zeps AHRECS Consultant Clinical trials are widely accepted as the best method for understanding whether any particular medical
Advances in Medicine often require innovation in ethical thinking too
Nik Zeps and Tanya Symons AHRECS Consultant Breakthroughs in medicine often highlight the existing limitations of the frameworks established to
Inclusion of Culturally and Linguistically Diverse populations in Clinical Trials:
Nik Zeps AHRECS Consultant Clinical trials have enormous value to society as they provide the most robust means of working
The inclusion of retracted trials in systematic reviews: implications for patients’ safety
After a paper has been through peer review and has been published it is the obligation of the scientific community
Categories
Featured posts
A users perspective on the ethics application process in Australia-room for improvement
Suat Chin Ng. MBBS, BMedSc, FRACS. Department of Surgery, Eastern Health, Melbourne, Australia. Wei
Ethical use of social media as a recruitment tool
Building the Conversation From this month we will start including posts about the ethical
An Open Invitation to Research an Ethics Committee
Jay Marlowe and Martin Tolich have had an article published (in press) in Research
The trouble with circRNAs- are researchers going around in circles?
In this very interesting post, Professor Jennifer Byrne (University of Sydney Faculty of Medicine and Health, NSW Health Pathology) looks at the mistakes being made in circRNAs papers, even in high-profile, supposedly high-quality and distinguished publications.
She reflects on what might be the cause of those mistakes, why they are a big deal what could be the consequences.
Why is it that honest researchers make such a serious mistake?
Is a sign of lack of experience, insight and knowledge? Or is it an indication something far more dubious and questionable?
This very accessible post does a great job of explaining complex genetic concepts in lay terms.
This points to the need for research institutions and research publishers to have sufficient expertise in the topic, to truly understand circRNAs and reagents.