Search

Presents a paper which focuses on the medical ethics in support of the policy of voluntary, unpaid donation of blood, in light of Article 3.4 of the European Community directive 39/381. What Article 3.4 requires; Arguments highlighted in the paper; Conclusions reached.

Although the adverse implications of physician advertising are the subject of a fierce and sustained debate, there is almost no scholarly discussion on the ethical repercussions of physician advertising bans. The present paper draws attention to these repercussions as they exist today in most of the world, with particular focus on three serious implications for the public: (a) uncertainty about the physician's interests, namely, that patients must trust the physician to put patient wellbeing ahead of possible gains when taking medical decisions; (b) uncertainty about alternative treatments, namely, that patients must trust in the physician's treatment decisions; and (c) uncertainty about the exclusive patient -- physician relationship, namely, that patients must develop and maintain a good relationship with one physician. Physician advertising bans continue to tell the public in most of the modern world that these are irrelevant or inappropriate issues, meaning that they are effectively left to the public to resolve. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Radical changes are taking place in the United Kingdom in relation to the classification of, and access to, medicines. More and more medicines are being made available over the counter both in local pharmacies and in supermarkets. The provision of more open access to medicines may be hailed as a triumph for patient autonomy. This paper examines whether such a claim is real or illusory. It explores the ethical and legal implications of deregulating medicines. Do patients benefit? What is the impact on pharmacists? Are the true beneficiaries of change largely the pharmaceutical industries? [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper reports a European Forum for Good Clinical Practice workshop held in 2011 to consider a research ethics committee training syllabus, subsequent training needs and resources. The syllabus that was developed was divided into four competencies: committee working; scientific method; ethical analysis and the regulatory framework. Appropriate training needs for each, with possible resources, were discussed. Lack of funding for training was reported as a major problem but affordable alternatives were debated. Strengths and weaknesses of this approach were discussed and the resultant proposal will be disseminated through the European Forum for Good Clinical Practice and the research ethics committees of member states. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]