BookDOI
Ethics for life scientists
TLDR
In this article, the authors present ethical challenges for the life sciences, including ethical conduct of research, including responsible authorship and publication practices, and professional ethics and scholarly communication, as well as some recent challenges to openness and freedom in scientific publication.Abstract:
Introduction: Ethical challenges for the life sciences.- Researchers in Organizations.- Moral complexity in organizations.- Comments on Jeurissen: Organization and moral complexity.- The social role of businesses and the role of the professional.- Comments on Wempe: Conditions for ethical business.- Responsible Authorship and Communication.- The responsible conduct of research, including responsible authorship and publication practices.- Comments on Bulger: The responsible conduct of research, including responsible authorship and publication practices.- Professional ethics and scholarly communication.- Comments on Zwart: Professional ethics and scholarly communication.- Some recent challenges to openness and freedom in scientific publication.- Comments on Resnik: Some recent challenges to openness and freedom in scientific publication.- Ethics of Animal Research.- Research ethics for animal biotechnology.- Comments on Thompson: Research ethics for animal biotechnology.- Ethics for Life Scientists as a Challenge for Ethics.- How common morality relates to business and the professions.- Comments on Gert: Gert's common morality: old-fashioned or untimely?.- Research as a challenge for ethical reflection.- Comments on Duwell: Research as a challenge for ethical reflection.- Scientists in Society.- New public responsibilities for life scientists.- Comments on Korthals: New public responsibilities for life scientists.- Science, context and professional ethics.- Bioscientists as ethical decision-makers.- Comments on Hayry: Assessing bioscientific work from a moral point of view.- New Developments.- The human genome: common resource but not common heritage.- Conclusions.- Conclusions: Towards ethically sound life sciences.read more
Citations
More filters
Assessing the risks and benefits of flowering field edges. Strategic use of nectar sources to boost biological control
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors analyzed a number of nectar plants with respect to their potential benefit for cabbage pests and/or their natural enemies and concluded that a selective approach and a careful choice of plant species are necessary to achieve improved biological control by flowering field edges.
Journal ArticleDOI
Biobanking and public health: is a human rights approach the tie that binds?
Eric M. Meslin,Ibrahim Garba +1 more
TL;DR: The value of using human rights as a public health ethics framework to address this tension in biobanking by applying it to two illustrative cases is demonstrated.
Journal ArticleDOI
The Nobel Prize as a Reward Mechanism in the Genomics Era: Anonymous Researchers, Visible Managers and the Ethics of Excellence
TL;DR: The HGP is taken as a case study to consider the ethical question to what extent it is still possible, in an era of big science, of large-scale consortia and global team work, to acknowledge and reward individual contributions to important breakthroughs in biomedical fields.
Assessing the risks and benefits of flowering field edges.
TL;DR: Within the multitrophic system ‘cabbage herbivores natural enemies’ the aim is at identifying flowering plant species which selectively fulfil the needs of predators and parasitoids of key pests without supporting these pest organisms.