What challenges offers nanotechnology to bioethics?

Though nowadays science means progress, for some people it means a moral danger. However, the progress should not be suppressed, and in every case, it should be controlled. These authors uphold that science and morality are closely linked and complementary. That is, technology, society and morality, by themselves, do not have the absolute truth and must be complemented among them without any of the three being suppressed.     

A New Concept of the Citizen-Soldier

The military manpower demands created by U.S. operations in Afghanistan and Iraq are causing extraordinary strains on recruitment, and the desirable size of the U.S. armed forces has become a topic of national concern. One key issue is the balance between active-duty forces and the reserve components, citizen-soldiers who face numerous service-related issues that the active-duty forces do not and who have their own unique sociology. We cannot continue to rely on the reserves for missions such as Iraq and Afghanistan, but must look to the use of short-term active-duty enlistments, drawn from recent college graduates, to perform duties currently being performed by reservists and even active-duty personnel.     

Was Knut Wicksell a conservative or a radical? A note on an early monograph by Knut Wicksell

The article reviews a small monograph by K. Wicksell entitled Our taxes. Who pays them and who should pay them? It sheds some light on why Wicksell, a radical of his time, was so conservative as an economist. This paradox comes because Wicksell, as an economist, is often brought in line with the unanimity principle. Correctly seen, Wicksell pleaded for general franchise and proportional representation under the unanimity constraint. This was a radical proposal in his time because it contributed to shift the burden of taxation from the poor to the rich by implementing the benefit principle.

     

Managing incidental findings in human subjects research: analysis and recommendations.

No consensus yet exists on how to handle incidental findings (IFs) in human subjects research. Yet empirical studies document IFs in a wide range of research studies, where IFs are findings beyond the aims of the study that are of potential health or reproductive importance to the individual research participant. This paper reports recommendations of a two-year project group funded by NIH to study how to manage IFs in genetic and genomic research, as well as imaging research. We conclude that researchers have an obligation to address the possibility of discovering IFs in their protocol and communications with the IRB, and in their consent forms and communications with research participants. Researchers should establish a pathway for handling IFs and communicate that to the IRB and research participants. We recommend a pathway and categorize IFs into those that must be disclosed to research participants, those that may be disclosed, and those that should not be disclosed.