Vakharia Kunal
Neurosurgery, University at Buffalo - The State University of New York, Buffalo, NY 14260-1660, USA
J Med Ethics. 2020 Jun 3. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2020-106467.
After the initial surge in cases of coronavirus (COVID-19), the outbreak has been managed differently in different countries. In the USA, it has been managed in many different ways between states, cities and even counties. This disparity is slowly becoming more and more pronounced with the advent of antibody testing. Although many argue over the potential merits of antibody testing as an immunity passport to allow the economy to restart, there are other implications that stand at the heart of the bioethical debate that are often overlooked. Particularly with COVID-19, there are many uncertainties and the discourse alone of antibodies presumes misinformation that may outweigh the epidemiological benefits of antibody testing. Although this paper does not seek to eliminate antibody testing, it does highlight the need for appropriate counselling both on a personal level with each patient but on a more global level. This moral standard of appropriate education is key to allowing the continued autonomy needed during this pandemic.
在冠状病毒（COVID-19）病例最初激增之后，不同国家对疫情的管控方式各不相同。在美国，各州、各城市甚至各县的管控方式都大相径庭。随着抗体检测的出现，这种差异正变得越来越明显。尽管许多人争论抗体检测作为允许经济重启的免疫通行证的潜在好处，但生物伦理辩论的核心还有其他一些往往被忽视的影响。特别是对于COVID-19，存在许多不确定性，仅关于抗体的讨论就假定了可能超过抗体检测流行病学益处的错误信息。虽然本文并非旨在消除抗体检测，但它确实强调了在个人层面为每位患者以及在更广泛的全球层面进行适当咨询的必要性。这种适当教育的道德标准是在这场大流行期间保持所需的持续自主性的关键。
