Hastings Cent Rep. 2020 Jan;50(1):8-9. doi: 10.1002/hast.1077.
In the 1960s, human experimentation and public funding of research increased significantly, and with the rise of the modern teaching hospital, the distinction between clinical care and experimentation became more and more blurred. Yet little in the way of meaningful government regulation existed in the United States prior to 1970. In 1966, Paul Freund, the president of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, appointed an interdisciplinary working group to consult on the issues being raised by human experimentation. Contributions from the group were published in a 1969 issue of Daedalus titled Ethical Aspects of Experimentation with Human Subjects. In the lead essay, Hans Jonas challenged then-conventional understandings of the moral problems posed by research involving humans and argued for an alternative moral framework. To Jonas, it mattered whether the physician was trying to make the patient well rather than trying to find out how to improve the health of future patients.
20 世纪 60 年代，人体实验和医学研究的公共资金投入显著增加，随着现代教学医院的兴起，临床护理和实验之间的区别越来越模糊。但在 1970 年之前，美国几乎没有任何有意义的政府监管。1966 年，美国艺术与科学院院长保罗·弗伦德（Paul Freund）任命了一个跨学科工作组，就人体实验引发的问题进行咨询。该工作组的意见在 1969 年一期的《代达罗斯》（Daedalus）杂志上发表，标题为《人体实验的伦理方面》（Ethical Aspects of Experimentation with Human Subjects）。在开篇文章中，汉斯·约纳斯（Hans Jonas）对当时涉及人体研究的道德问题的传统观念提出了挑战，并为一种替代的道德框架进行了辩护。对约纳斯来说，重要的是医生是试图让病人康复，还是试图找出如何改善未来病人的健康。
