Cox P
University of Massachusetts, Dartmouth, USA.
Int J Appl Philos. 1999 Fall;13(2):177-85. doi: 10.5840/ijap199913211.
Recently a number of AIDS/AZT research studies, carried out by U.S. universities, have come under intense ethical scrutiny. In these studies, control groups of HIV-positive pregnant women were being given a placebo rather than AZT. Such research protocols would be illegal if practiced in the U.S. I examine a number of lamentable ethical lapses in the studies, and conclude that at least some of these ethical problems are traceable to a troubling contradiction between differing international codes of ethics. In a word, some international codes mandate that all research subjects (including control groups) receive the best standard of care available in the country sponsoring the research, while others suggest that providing only a "local" standard of care is ethically appropriate. I argue that these two ethical mandates cannot both be satisfied, and that host country populations will remain subject to exploitation unless this contradiction is resolved.
最近，美国一些大学开展的多项艾滋病/齐多夫定（AZT）研究受到了严格的伦理审查。在这些研究中，感染艾滋病毒的孕妇对照组被给予的是安慰剂而非AZT。这样的研究方案如果在美国实施将是非法的。我审视了这些研究中一些令人遗憾的伦理失误，并得出结论：至少其中一些伦理问题可追溯到不同国际伦理准则之间令人不安的矛盾。简而言之，一些国际准则规定，所有研究对象（包括对照组）都应获得开展研究所在国家可提供的最佳护理标准，而另一些准则则认为，仅提供“当地”护理标准在伦理上是合适的。我认为这两项伦理要求无法同时满足，并且除非解决这一矛盾，否则东道国人口仍将遭受剥削。
