Search

Researchers conduct observational human exposure studies to understand how and the extent to which people come into contact with chemicals and environmental stressors in their everyday lives, through the air they breathe, the food and liquids they consume, and the things they touch. This book looks at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) National Exposure Research Laboratory (NERL) which has conducted observational human exposure studies for several decades and uses the information and data from these studies to improve the Agency's understanding of human exposures to chemicals and other stressors and ultimately to support efforts to improve public health. This book consists of public documents which have been located, gathered, combined, reformatted, and enhanced with a subject index, selectively edited and bound to provide easy access.

In the past 30 years, the population of prisoners in the United States has expanded almost 5-fold, correctional facilities are increasingly overcrowded, and more of the country's disadvantaged populations&#8212racial minorities, women, people with mental illness, and people with communicable diseases such as HIV/AIDS, hepatitis C, and tuberculosis&#8212are under correctional supervision. Because prisoners face restrictions on liberty and autonomy, have limited privacy, and often receive inadequate health care, they require specific protections when involved in research, particularly in today's correctional settings. Given these issues, the Department of Health and Human Services'Office for Human Research Protections commissioned the Institute of Medicine to review the ethical considerations regarding research involving prisoners. The resulting analysis contained in this book, Ethical Considerations for Research Involving Prisoners, emphasizes five broad actions to provide prisoners involved in research with critically important protections: &#8226 expand the definition of'prisoner'; &#8226 ensure universally and consistently applied standards of protection; &#8226 shift from a category-based to a risk-benefit approach to research review; &#8226 update the ethical framework to include collaborative responsibility; and &#8226 enhance systematic oversight of research involving prisoners.

When a young man named Jesse Gelsinger died in 1999 as a result of his participation in a gene transfer research study, regulatory agencies in the United States began to take a closer look at what was happening in medical research. The resulting temporary shutdown of some of the most prestigious academic research centres confirmed what various recent reports in the United States as well as Canada had claimed; that the current system of regulatory oversight was in need of improvement.Law and Ethics in Biomedical Research uses the Gelinger case as a touchstone, illustrating how three major aspects of that case - the flaws in the regulatory system, conflicts of interest, and legal liability - embody the major challenges in the current medical research environment. Editors Trudo Lemmens and Duff R. Waring, along with a host of top scholars in the field, demonstrate why existing models of research review and human subject protection are in need of improvement, and how more stringent regulatory and legal means can be used to strengthen the protection of research subjects and the integrity of research.The contributors also address conflicts of interest, paying particular attention to the growing commercialization of medical research, as well as the legal liability of scientific investigators, research institutions, and governmental agencies. Legal liability is a growing concern in medical research and this fascinating study is, in the international context, one of the first to explore the liability of various parties involved in the research enterprise.

Research physicians face intractable dilemmas when they consider introducing new medical procedures. Innovations carry the promise of preventing or curing life-threatening diseases, but they can also lead to injury or even death. How have clinical scientists made high-stakes decisions about undertaking human tests of new medical treatments? In Lesser Harms, Sydney Halpern explores this issue as she examines vaccine trials in America during the early and mid-twentieth century. Today's scientists follow federal guidelines for research on human subjects developed during the 1960s and 1970s. But long before these government regulations, medical investigators observed informal rules when conducting human research. They insisted that the dangers of natural disease should outweigh the risks of a medical intervention, and they struggled to accurately assess the relative hazards. Halpern explores this logic of risk in immunization controversies extending as far back as the eighteenth century. Then, focusing on the period between 1930 and 1960, she shows how research physicians and their sponsors debated the moral quandaries involved in moving vaccine use from the laboratory to the clinic. This probing work vividly describes the efforts of clinical investigators to balance the benefits and dangers of untested vaccines, to respond to popular sentiment about medical hazards, and to strategically present risk laden research to sponsors and the public. “Concise and extremely well-written.... A fascinating synthesis of sociology, history, and institutional theory.”—Samuel C. Blackman, Journal of the American Medical Association