University of Washington--Bothell, 18115 Campus Way NE, Bothell, WA 98011, USA.
Soc Stud Sci. 2010 Dec;40(6):843-70. doi: 10.1177/0306312710371145.
This paper builds on the growing literature in 'postcolonial technoscience' by examining how science and ethics travel in transnational HIV research. I use examples of two controversial US-funded studies of mother-to-child transmission in Africa as case studies through which to explore quandaries of difference and inequality in global health research. My aim is not to adjudicate the debates over these studies, but rather to raise some questions about transnational research, science, and ethics that often get lost in public controversies over the moral status of such trials. Using interviews conducted with American and Ugandan HIV researchers as well as relevant material published in the popular and medical press, I argue that debates over research practice and the conditions under which practices are deemed ethically legitimate or questionable reflect the challenges faced by African researchers seeking to participate in global health science. In doing so, I show how questions of scientific legitimacy and authority are played out in debates over who decides what constitutes 'the normal' in human biological research and who can legitimately 'speak for Africa' regarding the ethics of research design and practice. I conclude that researchers from'resource-poor settings' must often walk a tightrope between claims of difference from the global North and assertions of sameness, in which a claim too forceful in either direction can undermine the ethical--and thus scientific--legitimacy of their research.
本文以“后殖民技术科学”领域不断增长的文献为基础，考察了科学和伦理如何在跨国 HIV 研究中传播。我使用了两个有争议的美国资助的非洲母婴传播研究作为案例研究，通过这些研究来探讨在全球健康研究中差异和不平等的困境。我的目的不是裁决这些研究的争议，而是提出一些关于跨国研究、科学和伦理的问题，这些问题往往在公众对这些试验的道德地位的争议中被忽视。通过对美国和乌干达的 HIV 研究人员进行访谈以及在大众和医学媒体上发表的相关材料，我认为，关于研究实践的争论以及实践被认为在伦理上是合法还是值得怀疑的条件，反映了寻求参与全球健康科学的非洲研究人员所面临的挑战。通过这样做，我展示了科学合法性和权威性的问题是如何在关于谁决定什么构成人类生物学研究的“正常”以及谁可以合法地“代表非洲”进行研究设计和实践的伦理问题的争论中体现出来的。我得出结论，来自“资源匮乏环境”的研究人员必须在来自全球北方的差异主张和相同主张之间走钢丝，在这两个方向上的任何一个主张过于强烈都可能破坏其研究的伦理——因此也是科学——合法性。
