Michael E. Sughrue, J. Mocco, Willam J. Mack, Andrew F. Ducruet, Ricardo J. Komotar, Ruth L. Fischbach, Thomas E. Martin & E. Sander Connolly
American Journal of Bioethics 9 (5):1-3 (2009)
Abstract |
Controversy and activism have long been linked to the subject of primate research. Even in the midst of raging ethical debates surrounding fertility treatments, genetically modified foods and stem-cell research, there has been no reduction in the campaigns of activists worldwide. Plying their trade of intimidation aimed at ending biomedical experimentation in all animals, they have succeeded in creating an environment where research institutions, often painted as guilty until proven innocent, have avoided addressing the issue for fear of becoming targets. One area of intense debate is the use of primates in stroke research. Despite the fact that stroke kills more people each year than AIDS and malaria, and less than 5% of patients are candidates for current therapies, there is significant opposition to primate stroke research. A balanced examination of the ethics of primate stroke research is thus of broad interest to all areas of biomedical research.
|
Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) |
Categories | (categorize this paper) |
ISBN(s) | |
DOI | 10.1080/15265160902851054 |
Options |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Download options
References found in this work BETA
Bioethical Considerations in Translational Research: Primate Stroke.Michael E. Sughrue, J. Mocco, Willam J. Mack, Andrew F. Ducruet, Ricardo J. Komotar, Ruth L. Fischbach, Thomas E. Martin & E. Sander Connolly - 2009 - American Journal of Bioethics 9 (5):3-12.
Nonhuman Primate Research: The Wrong Way to Understand Needs and Necessity.John Rossi - 2009 - American Journal of Bioethics 9 (5):21-23.
Bioethical Considerations in Translational Research: Primate Stroke.Michael E. Sughrue - 2009 - American Journal of Bioethics 9 (5):3-12.
Primate Stroke Research: Still Not Interested.Monica L. Gerrek - 2009 - American Journal of Bioethics 9 (5):29-30.
Interests and Harms in Primate Research.Nathan Nobis - 2009 - American Journal of Bioethics 9 (5):27-29.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Bioethical Considerations in Translational Research: Primate Stroke.Michael E. Sughrue, J. Mocco, Willam J. Mack, Andrew F. Ducruet, Ricardo J. Komotar, Ruth L. Fischbach, Thomas E. Martin & E. Sander Connolly - 2009 - American Journal of Bioethics 9 (5):3-12.
Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “The Ethos and Ethics of Translational Research”.Jason Scott Robert, Mary Sunderland, Rachel A. Ankeny & Jane Maienschein - 2008 - American Journal of Bioethics 8 (3):1-3.
An Unbiased Response to the Open Peer Commentaries on “Does Consent Bias Research?”.Mark A. Rothstein & Abigail B. Shoben - 2013 - American Journal of Bioethics 13 (4):W1 - W4.
Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “Social Contexts Influence Ethical Considerations of Research”.Robert J. Levine, Judith B. Gordon, Carolyn M. Mazure, Philip E. Rubin, Barry R. Schaller & John L. Young - 2011 - American Journal of Bioethics 11 (5):W1-W2.
Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “A Duty to Participate in Research: Does Social Context Matter?”.Inmaculada de Melo-Martín - 2008 - American Journal of Bioethics 8 (10):3-4.
Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “Community Members as Recruiters of Human Subjects: Ethical Considerations”.Christian Simon & Maghboeba Mosavel - 2010 - American Journal of Bioethics 10 (3):1-3.
Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “Withdrawal of Nonfutile Life Support After Attempted Suicide”.Samuel M. Brown, C. Gregory Elliott & Robert Paine - 2013 - American Journal of Bioethics: 13 (3):W3 - W5.
Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “Must Research Participants Understand Randomization?”.David Wendler - 2009 - American Journal of Bioethics 9 (2):W1 – W2.
Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “How to Do Research Fairly in an Unjust World”.Angela J. Ballantyne - 2010 - American Journal of Bioethics 10 (6):4-6.
Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “Justifying a Presumption of Restraint in Animal Biotechnology Research”.Autumn Fiester - 2008 - American Journal of Bioethics 8 (6):W1 – W2.
Response to Open Peer Commentaries for “Ethical Considerations of Providing Screening Tests to Individuals When Evidence is Insufficient to Support Screening Populations”.Ingrid M. Burger & Nancy E. Kass - 2009 - American Journal of Bioethics 9 (4):1-2.
Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “Research 2.0: Social Networking and Direct-to-Consumer Personal Genomics”.Sandra Soo-Jin Lee & LaVera Crawley - 2009 - American Journal of Bioethics 9 (6-7):1-3.
Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “Why Treat the Wounded?”.Michael L. Gross - 2008 - American Journal of Bioethics 8 (2):W1 – W3.
Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “The Ethical 'Elephant' in the Death Penalty 'Room”'.Michael Keane - 2008 - American Journal of Bioethics 8 (10):5-6.
Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “Disclosing Individual Genetic Results to Research Participants”: Defining Clinical Utility And Revisiting the Role of Relationships.Vardit Ravitsky & Benjamin S. Wilfond - 2006 - American Journal of Bioethics 6 (6):W10-W12.
Analytics
Added to PP index
2010-09-14
Total views
22 ( #515,864 of 2,520,404 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #405,718 of 2,520,404 )
2010-09-14
Total views
22 ( #515,864 of 2,520,404 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #405,718 of 2,520,404 )
How can I increase my downloads?
Downloads