Conflictos en ética de investigación con seres humanos

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Kottow, Miguel H.
Data de Publicação: 2005
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: spa
Título da fonte: Cadernos de Saúde Pública
Texto Completo: https://cadernos.ensp.fiocruz.br/ojs/index.php/csp/article/view/2432
Resumo: The Declaration of Helsinki (2000) helped trigger a major debate on many ethical aspects of research with human subjects. Topics under discussion include the use of placebos, the application of equipoise, the distinction between research ethics and clinical ethics, and the difference between therapeutic and non-therapeutic trials. This article supports tenets that serve to protect patients involved in research, especially in those aspects concerning maintenance of best existing therapy, the rejection of using placebos, support of equipoise, the assurance that required medication shall be available beyond the termination of the research project, and that appropriate compensation will obtain to host communities inasmuch as they may have facilitated and supported the project. The current proposal of introducing a double ethical standard, aspirational for developed countries and pragmatic for poor nations, should be rejected, since it contravenes the universalizability of prescriptive ethics.
id FIOCRUZ-5_8978fa3f219e6252d05431e4d18c002f
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs.teste-cadernos.ensp.fiocruz.br:article/2432
network_acronym_str FIOCRUZ-5
network_name_str Cadernos de Saúde Pública
repository_id_str
spelling Conflictos en ética de investigación con seres humanosÉtica en InvestigaciónDeclaración de HelsinkiPlacebosThe Declaration of Helsinki (2000) helped trigger a major debate on many ethical aspects of research with human subjects. Topics under discussion include the use of placebos, the application of equipoise, the distinction between research ethics and clinical ethics, and the difference between therapeutic and non-therapeutic trials. This article supports tenets that serve to protect patients involved in research, especially in those aspects concerning maintenance of best existing therapy, the rejection of using placebos, support of equipoise, the assurance that required medication shall be available beyond the termination of the research project, and that appropriate compensation will obtain to host communities inasmuch as they may have facilitated and supported the project. The current proposal of introducing a double ethical standard, aspirational for developed countries and pragmatic for poor nations, should be rejected, since it contravenes the universalizability of prescriptive ethics.Desde la Declaración de Helsinki 2000, se intensificó y amplió un conflictivo debate que ha cuestionado muchos aspectos de la ética de investigación con seres humanos. La polémica incluye el uso de placebos, la aplicación del concepto de equiponderación, la distinción entre ética de investigación y ética clínica, así como la diferencia entre ensayos terapéuticos y no terapéuticos. El presente artículo insiste en fortalecer todos los argumentos, parámetros y estrategias de investigación que sean necesarios para proteger a los paciente-probandos, ante todo el mantenimiento de la mejor terapia existente, el rechazo del uso de placebos, la aplicación de la equiponderación, la preservación de requerimientos terapéuticos más allá del estudio y la compensación a comunidades-huésped en la medida que ellas hayan facilitado y apoyado la investigación. La propuesta de establecer un doble estándar de ética de investigación en seres humanos, una de máximos para países desarrollados y otra de mínimos pragmáticos a aplicar en países de desarrollo precario, debe ser rechazada por contravenir las intenciones de universalizabilidad de toda prescripción ética.Reports in Public HealthCadernos de Saúde Pública2005-06-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlapplication/pdfhttps://cadernos.ensp.fiocruz.br/ojs/index.php/csp/article/view/2432Reports in Public Health; Vol. 21 No. 3 (2005): May/JuneCadernos de Saúde Pública; v. 21 n. 3 (2005): Maio/Junho1678-44640102-311Xreponame:Cadernos de Saúde Públicainstname:Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (FIOCRUZ)instacron:FIOCRUZspahttps://cadernos.ensp.fiocruz.br/ojs/index.php/csp/article/view/2432/4868https://cadernos.ensp.fiocruz.br/ojs/index.php/csp/article/view/2432/4869Kottow, Miguel H.info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2024-03-06T15:27:02Zoai:ojs.teste-cadernos.ensp.fiocruz.br:article/2432Revistahttps://cadernos.ensp.fiocruz.br/ojs/index.php/csphttps://cadernos.ensp.fiocruz.br/ojs/index.php/csp/oaicadernos@ensp.fiocruz.br||cadernos@ensp.fiocruz.br1678-44640102-311Xopendoar:2024-03-06T13:02:50.806216Cadernos de Saúde Pública - Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (FIOCRUZ)true
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Conflictos en ética de investigación con seres humanos
title Conflictos en ética de investigación con seres humanos
spellingShingle Conflictos en ética de investigación con seres humanos
Kottow, Miguel H.
Ética en Investigación
Declaración de Helsinki
Placebos
title_short Conflictos en ética de investigación con seres humanos
title_full Conflictos en ética de investigación con seres humanos
title_fullStr Conflictos en ética de investigación con seres humanos
title_full_unstemmed Conflictos en ética de investigación con seres humanos
title_sort Conflictos en ética de investigación con seres humanos
author Kottow, Miguel H.
author_facet Kottow, Miguel H.
author_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Kottow, Miguel H.
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Ética en Investigación
Declaración de Helsinki
Placebos
topic Ética en Investigación
Declaración de Helsinki
Placebos
description The Declaration of Helsinki (2000) helped trigger a major debate on many ethical aspects of research with human subjects. Topics under discussion include the use of placebos, the application of equipoise, the distinction between research ethics and clinical ethics, and the difference between therapeutic and non-therapeutic trials. This article supports tenets that serve to protect patients involved in research, especially in those aspects concerning maintenance of best existing therapy, the rejection of using placebos, support of equipoise, the assurance that required medication shall be available beyond the termination of the research project, and that appropriate compensation will obtain to host communities inasmuch as they may have facilitated and supported the project. The current proposal of introducing a double ethical standard, aspirational for developed countries and pragmatic for poor nations, should be rejected, since it contravenes the universalizability of prescriptive ethics.
publishDate 2005
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2005-06-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://cadernos.ensp.fiocruz.br/ojs/index.php/csp/article/view/2432
url https://cadernos.ensp.fiocruz.br/ojs/index.php/csp/article/view/2432
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv spa
language spa
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://cadernos.ensp.fiocruz.br/ojs/index.php/csp/article/view/2432/4868
https://cadernos.ensp.fiocruz.br/ojs/index.php/csp/article/view/2432/4869
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Reports in Public Health
Cadernos de Saúde Pública
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Reports in Public Health
Cadernos de Saúde Pública
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Reports in Public Health; Vol. 21 No. 3 (2005): May/June
Cadernos de Saúde Pública; v. 21 n. 3 (2005): Maio/Junho
1678-4464
0102-311X
reponame:Cadernos de Saúde Pública
instname:Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (FIOCRUZ)
instacron:FIOCRUZ
instname_str Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (FIOCRUZ)
instacron_str FIOCRUZ
institution FIOCRUZ
reponame_str Cadernos de Saúde Pública
collection Cadernos de Saúde Pública
repository.name.fl_str_mv Cadernos de Saúde Pública - Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (FIOCRUZ)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv cadernos@ensp.fiocruz.br||cadernos@ensp.fiocruz.br
_version_ 1798943355014479872