Weed D L
Preventive Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD 20892.
Ann Epidemiol. 1994 Mar;4(2):166-71. doi: 10.1016/1047-2797(94)90064-7.
This article examines current ethics guidelines for recommendations on advocacy as an acceptable activity for epidemiologists. Three sets of guidelines, those produced by the Industrial Epidemiology Forum (IEF), the International Epidemiological Association (IEA), and the Council of International Organizations of Medical Sciences (CIOMS), appear to endorse the role of advocate, although there are differences in their recommendations. The IEF guidelines hint that advocacy is appropriate, the IEA guidelines recommend separating the roles of scientist and advocate, and the CIOMS guidelines recommend advocacy dependent on the quality of epidemiologic research and on causal interpretations of the data. Advocacy in the form of public health recommendations can be justified in terms of the principle of beneficence found in the guidelines, but is a central obligation only if the aims of the profession are enlarged to include not only the study of disease but also a commitment to disease prevention. An important issue in women's health--alcohol and breast cancer--provides an illustrative example.
本文探讨了当前关于倡导作为流行病学家可接受活动的建议的伦理准则。有三套准则,即由职业流行病学论坛(IEF)、国际流行病学协会(IEA)和国际医学科学组织理事会(CIOMS)制定的准则,似乎都认可倡导者的角色,尽管它们的建议存在差异。IEF准则暗示倡导是合适的,IEA准则建议将科学家和倡导者的角色分开,而CIOMS准则建议倡导要取决于流行病学研究的质量以及对数据的因果解释。从准则中发现的行善原则来看,以公共卫生建议形式进行的倡导是合理的,但只有当该职业的目标扩大到不仅包括疾病研究,还包括对疾病预防的承诺时,倡导才是一项核心义务。女性健康中的一个重要问题——酒精与乳腺癌——提供了一个例证。