2 business questions

1. Sometimes, research with new pharmaceutical products may be risky to human subjects. It's big business - look what Viagra did for Pfizer stock. And, as patents expire, companies need new designer drugs to maintain profit margins. What tradeoffs do you see between full disclosure of all research risks and preventing potential subject bias? What other ethical considerations can you identify when working with human subjects?

2. A survey conducted by Tufts University researchers and published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (2/02) queried medical experts who write guidelines for treating conditions like heart disease, depression and diabetes. The research found that nearly 9 out of 10 experts have financial ties to the pharmaceutical industry, and the ties are almost never disclosed. Is this just a way for medical researchers to supplement bare-bones salaries? Or does it place them in the pocket of the pharmaceutical industry? What are the ethical problems with this? After all, if we require that researchers sever all financial ties, the field would be even less attractive than it is now. But, researchers may be unwilling or unable to bite the hand that feeds them. What do you think?

******PLEASE DO NOT COMBINE ANSWERS********