We don’t need no stinking consent forms

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


A healer’s first rule is ‘do no harm,’ right? Not necessarily. Growing numbers of drug researchers are heading for little-regulated Third World countries to test their wares, and the dubious ethics of some recent such trials has ignited a hot debate among doctors and scientists. The issue will be high on the agenda as the World Medical Association meets this week, reports the GUARDIAN (UK).

In one test in China, people were deliberately infected with malaria to see if it reduced the level of HIV infection. Hundreds of infants unlucky enough to be born into the control group of a study in Africa were allowed to become infected with HIV when the condition might have been prevented.

Defenders of these tests say the more stringent guidelines used in the US and other developed countries, which require the control group to be given some form of treatment, would be meaningless in poor countries. In, say, Uganda, they argue, the only alternative to the test drug is no drug, so that’s what the tests should use. “It is all well and good to create something in Uganda that simulates London or New York [by giving various treatments to all the groups in a trial], but what you get out of that is data that is no good anywhere other than London or New York,” says Robert Levine, a professor at Yale University School of Medicine.

TIME IS RUNNING OUT!

We have an ambitious $350,000 online fundraising goal this month and it's truly crunch time: About 15 percent of our yearly online giving usually comes in during the final week of the year, and in "No Cute Headlines or Manipulative BS," we explain why we simply can't afford to come up short right now.

The bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. And advertising or profit-driven ownership groups will never make time-intensive, in-depth reporting viable.

That's why donations big and small make up 74 percent of our budget this year. There is no backup to keep us going, no alternate revenue source, no secret benefactor. If readers don’t donate, we won’t be here. It's that simple.

And if you can help us out with a donation right now, all online gifts will be matched thanks to an incredibly generous matching gift pledge.

payment methods

TIME IS RUNNING OUT!

We have an ambitious $350,000 online fundraising goal this month and it's truly crunch time: About 15 percent of our yearly online giving usually comes in during the final week of the year, and in "No Cute Headlines or Manipulative BS," we explain why we simply can't afford to come up short right now.

The bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. And advertising or profit-driven ownership groups will never make time-intensive, in-depth reporting viable.

That's why donations big and small make up 74 percent of our budget this year. There is no backup to keep us going, no alternate revenue source, no secret benefactor. If readers don’t donate, we won’t be here. It's that simple.

And if you can help us out with a donation right now, all online gifts will be matched thanks to an incredibly generous matching gift pledge.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate