African Studies Center, 232 Bay State Road, Boston University. Boston, MA 02215, USA.
Dev World Bioeth. 2010 Apr;10(1):34-41. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-8847.2009.00274.x. Epub 2010 Jan 18.
This article reconstructs the history of medical research in East Africa (Kenya, Tanganyika, Uganda), laying out the lies, rumours, and oppressive techniques that made research such a fraught enterprise during the colonial era. The focus is on the beginning stages of medical research: researchers' arrivals, villagers' responses, the gathering of subjects and consent. New archival and oral sources gathered in East Africa illuminate the research encounter and reintegrate the perspective of villagers cum subjects. Data from the 1950s shows that upon arrival in a village, researchers regularly lied in order to avoid sensitive topics and sidestep potential opposition. Misinformation fuelled villagers' fears, skepticism and rumours of blood stealing researchers. When it came to gathering subjects, researchers were rarely involved in the challenging work of enticing villagers to participate, preferring to rely on chiefs. Chiefs, however, often relied on heavy-handed and ethically questionable techniques. The article concludes by looking at the much-discussed concept of group consent, and showing that historically a chief never had the authority to consent on behalf of villagers.
本文重构了东非（肯尼亚、坦桑尼亚、乌干达）的医学研究历史，揭示了殖民时期使研究变得如此艰难的谎言、谣言和压迫性手段。重点放在医学研究的初始阶段：研究人员的到来、村民的反应、研究对象的招募和同意。在东非收集的新档案和口述资料阐明了研究的遭遇，并重新整合了村民兼研究对象的观点。20 世纪 50 年代的数据表明，研究人员抵达村庄后，经常为了避免敏感话题和避免潜在的反对而撒谎。错误信息加剧了村民的恐惧、怀疑和关于偷血研究人员的谣言。在招募研究对象时，研究人员很少参与吸引村民参与的挑战性工作，而是更愿意依赖酋长。然而，酋长们经常采用强硬且在道德上有问题的手段。本文最后探讨了备受讨论的群体同意概念，并表明从历史上看，酋长从未有权代表村民同意。
