Tag: NIH

Blog Posts (8)

October 14, 2016

Ethics & Society Newsfeed: October 14, 2016

Health Care and Bioethics DNA database highlights need for new medical privacy protections Creation of a national repository of genetic information is seen by some as crucial to reducing medical costs and improving people’s healthcare. ‘Big data’ could mean big … Continue reading
August 30, 2016

Will Research on 10,000 New Yorkers Fuel Future Racial Health Inequality?

By Celia B. Fisher, Ph.D. A 20-year, multi-million dollar study of more than 10,000 New Yorkers scheduled to begin next year claims that it will enable the development of theories, therapeutics, and policies to improve the health and quality of … Continue reading
August 15, 2016

Get the Public Involved in Chimera Research at NIH

by Carolyn Plunkett Neuhaus, Ph.D.

NIH is seeking public comment on a new policy regarding chimeras. From the Greek word for a fire-breathing animal with a lion’s head, a goat’s body, and a snake’s tail, “chimera” in this context means a non-human organism that has human components – such as human tissues or organs.…

June 17, 2016

Best intentions, worst outcomes: Ethical and legal challenges for international research involving sex workers

Central America hosts a thriving sex work industry that is a key source and transit region for sex trafficking and undocumented migrants engaged in sex work. Sex workers – particularly those who are migrant – are at high risk for … Continue reading
March 4, 2016

Ethics & Society Newsfeed: March 4, 2016

NIH vowed to move its research chimps from labs, but only 7 got safe haven in 2015 Nearly three years after the National Institutes of Health announced that hundreds of chimpanzees held for invasive medical experiments would be retired to a … Continue reading
August 19, 2015

NIH Budget Increase on One Hand, Fewer Outputs on Another

<p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="font-size: 11.1999998092651px; line-height: 19.0400009155273px;"><span style="font-size: 11.1999998092651px; line-height: 19.0400009155273px;">I love reading the news posts in </span><em style="font-size: 11.1999998092651px; line-height: 19.0400009155273px;">Nature </em><span style="font-size: 11.1999998092651px; line-height: 19.0400009155273px;">and </span><em style="font-size: 11.1999998092651px; line-height: 19.0400009155273px;">Science</em><span style="font-size: 11.1999998092651px; line-height: 19.0400009155273px;"> that I receive in the journal’s eAlerts. This past month was most interesting because there were two news posts that I thought were actually a bit contradicting. The first one titled “Spending bills put NIH on track for the biggest raise in 12 years” was published in July of this year and explains how both houses of congress want to increase the National Institutes of Health’s (NIH) annual budget (Kaiser, 2015a). The Presidential branch wants to give the NIH a 1 billion dollar increase while just recently, a Senate panel approved a 2 billion increase. The article also goes onto say that certain programs have been given priority such as the Alzheimer’s research and others like the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality will receive cuts. Needless to say, I am sure that biomedical and behavioral scientists throughout the country are probably ecstatic. But is this really a good thing?</span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="font-size: 11.1999998092651px; line-height: 19.0400009155273px;"><span style="font-size: 11.1999998092651px; line-height: 19.0400009155273px;">The other news blurb I read was titled an “A for effort, C for impact from U.S. biomedical research, study concludes” also written by the same author (Kaiser, 2015b). In this article, Jocelyn Kaiser reports the results of a study by two research scientists Dr. Arturo Casadevall and Anthony Bowen who examined publications in the PubMed database and the number of authors, along with the approval of new drugs and their work was published in the journal </span><em style="font-size: 11.1999998092651px; line-height: 19.0400009155273px;">Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (USA)</em><span style="font-size: 11.1999998092651px; line-height: 19.0400009155273px;">. The researchers compared publication outputs with the number of new molecules approved by the U.S. government. What they found was not too surprising. </span></p> <p><span style="color: #34405b; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 19.0400009155273px; font-size: 12px;"><strong>The Alden March Bioethics Institute offers a Master of Science in Bioethics, a</strong> </span><strong style="color: #34405b; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 19.0400009155273px; font-size: 12px;">Doctorate of Professional Studies in Bioethics, and Graduate Certificates in Clinical Ethics and Clinical Ethics Consultation. For more information on AMBI's online graduate programs, please visit our <a style="color: #000099; text-decoration: underline;" href="/Academic/bioethics/index.cfm">website</a>.</strong></p>
September 21, 2009

NIH Stem Cell Working Group Chaired By Card-Carrying Bioethicist?

With Jeffrey Botkin appointed as the Chair of the Working Group for Human Embryonic Stem Cell Eligibility Review, can anyone be surprised that the committee is also comprised of two other card-carrying bioethicists: Dena S.…

October 17, 2007

NIH director publicly opposes Bush position on embryonic stem cell research

Via Art Caplan comes this item from Mary Ann Akers’ WaPo blog “The Sleuth” in which she highlights Elias Zerhouni’s statements of support for embryonic stem cell research in a recent NIH magazine.…

Published Articles (1)

American Journal of Bioethics: Volume 6 Issue 3 - May 2006

Promoting the Participation of Minorities in Research

News (2)

April 25, 2012 11:35 am

Embryonic Stem Cells in Court Again (The Scientist)

National Institutes of Health guidelines released in 2009 lifted the Bush-era restrictions on hESC research, but were met with a lawsuit by adult stem cell researchers that August. A preliminary injunction by the US District Court in Washington, DC, prevented NIH funding for hESCs in August 2010. Just 2 weeks later, the US Court of Appeals for the District Court stayed the injunction, then overturned it for good in April 2011—3 months before the appeals court dismissed the lawsuit altogether. Now, the case is once again in appeals court, and current arguments focus on whether this earlier decision is binding.

April 12, 2012 9:58 pm

NIH Unperturbed by New Way of Peering Into Personal Genomic Data (Science Insider)

In a provocative paper published this week, researchers say they have figured out a way to link a person’s DNA to their anonymous genetic data in a certain kind of public research database. But the National Institutes of Health (NIH), which hosts one of the largest such databases, says it’s not taking any new steps to prevent someone from using the method to breach privacy. That contrasts with NIH’s response 4 years ago, when a similar study prompted the agency to pull genetic data from its public Web sites.