Scientific discovery outside of medicine certainly is affected by the ‘human side’ of scientists. That is, scientists have a non-objective effect on their research, simply because they are human. This is quite clearly evidenced in Steve Squyres’ Roving Mars, where the human elements of designing and using a vehicle to rove and discover Mars are brought into prominence. In some of Squyres’ concluding notes, he states that, “Above all, I simply hope that someone sees them [Spirit and Opportunity] again. A word like love is one to be used advisedly, especially when talking about pieces of metal. But I love Spirit and Opportunity. They were built by a loving family,” highlighting the notion that he and the members of his team—the rovers’ “family” …show more content…
Defining first Ralph M. Steinman’s discovery of dendritic cells as “remarkable for its implications, both for science and for him personally,” and then his fellow researchers as “the friends he made along the way,” Harmon clearly notes the human and personal aspects of medical discovery with regards to the researchers themselves. This is similar to the introduction of the same or similar elements in general scientific discovery, and has a similar effect on the discovery itself. Within both realms being discussed, the human aspect on the researchers’ side results in research and discoveries that the scientists are exceedingly engaged and invested in. However, where Harmon’s work differs from what can be observed within general scientific discovery is what needs further examination. A main topic that this difference occurs around is rigor. This is not to say that general scientific discovery does not follow rigorous guidelines and parameters—“carefully collecting data, evaluating the evidence, and doing out instructions,” as Steinman does is expected in medicinal and general science alike—it is simply to note that a human aspect contributed from the side of research subject (that cannot be contributed to general scientific discovery) is contributed to medicinal scientific discovery. For instance, Steinman’s participation in Charles Nicolette’s trial required approval from the FDA, …show more content…
For instance, one of the ways that the doctors advance medicine at war is by using a logistics based approach. Colonel Ronald Bellamy, “examined the statistics of the Vietnam War and found that helicopter evacuation had reduced the transport time for injured soldiers to hospital care from an average of over eleven hours in World War II to under an hour. And once they got surgical care, only 3 percent died. Yet, 24 percent of wounded soldiers died in all … transport time to surgical care in under an hour still wasn’t fast enough.” As the doctors are working with humans as the subjects for their research, they are forced to operate on these logistics and statistics studies, unlike in general scientific discovery. To determine the viability of a time frame for success in general science, researchers can implement a treatment and then observe how their research subject reacts over the time interval in question. This is done by the MER team, when they made modifications to their rovers and then placed them in an artificial Martian environment to test their viability and likelihood to succeed. However, when humans are the
Denno, D. W. (2006). The Scientific Shortcomings of Roper v. Simmons. Retrieved from : http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/faculty_scholarship/116
This can take a turn for the worse: if scientists have to have their work follow what politics, religions, and people believe, we might limit what science stands for. Religion and politics should never have control over science, instead they should use science to help explain their own goals. Science should be used as a way to challenge old beliefs and help clear out fact from fiction. At the same time though, science should challenge itself so it can stay true to its main point of challenging old dogmas, as Carl Sagan said in his article.
In The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks, Rebecca Skloot writes about one women’s journey to immortality. Through the telling of Henrietta’s —the immortal women’s—story, Skloot details some of the vast changes in biomedical research at this time: The HeLa cells —the first immortal human cells— attributed to many of these movements. With these cells, scientists were, and still are, making great strides in science. Namely, chemotherapy, cloning, gene mapping, in vitro fertilization, and many treatment medications stemmed from the HeLa cell line (Skloot 21). And perhaps, most notably, scientists discovered a polio vaccine using the HeLa cells. However, aside from the growths in biomedical research, Skloot highlights the corners that many scientists cut for their research. For one thing, Henrietta was not informed about her contribution to science: Henrietta’s doctors were not required to ask for her permission. The same holds true for other doctors at this time, as well. For this reason, all doctors held a significant amount of power over their patients. In short, Skloot portrays biomedical research as a practice with the need for advancements, informed consents, and a power shifts.
Andrea A. Lunsford and John J. Ruskiewicz. New York: St. Martins, 1997, 230-235. Thomas, Lewis "The Hazards of Science" The Presence of Others. Comp. Andrea A. Lunsford and John J. Ruskiewicz.
In this argumentative essay written by Dr. Ron Kline a pediatrician who wrote his essay titled “A Scientist: I am the enemy”. The article gives an insight on how animal research has helped many people and shine a light on the benefits of animal research. Ron Kline is the director of bone marrow transplants at the University of Louisville. Furthermore, the essay explains his thoughts and his own reasons for his love of medical research. In addition, the essay include the opposing side of the argument which has a lot feedback from activist groups that think that animal research is horrible.
Philosophical context: To discuss this question I will use “Values and Objectivity” by Helen Longino along with actual studies involving scientific objectivity. In Longino’s work, she sets up the avenues for criticism of scientific work and explains why they are important.
These elements guided the doctors and scientist of their times to continue pushing for truth and cures! The doctors must have been extremely concerned for their own lives at times because they had to deal with such harmful diseases, but yet, they did not allow their fears to ever get the best of them. They remained determined and due to this, we are living prosperous lives with inspiration and longevity. “Nonetheless, Lerner's journals showed how paternalism was born of a deep-seated devotion to patients.” (Good Doctor 1). Had they not stayed rigorous, focused, and dedicated to their patients, we would not have half as many amazing treatments modern day.
Society seems to be divided between the idea if science is more harmful than helpful. We live in a world where humans depend on science and technology to improve important aspects of society, such as medical machinery, which supports the fact that science is more of a friend than a foe. Science is advancing every day. The United States has come a long way with its ongoing developments, giving individuals a chance to improve society as a whole. Not only does the United States benefit from such growth, but every modernized country does so as well. Through science and technology, individuals learn from past endeavors and apply it to present and future projects, paving the way for new discoveries and efficient enhancements
Both in fiction and in real life a certain breed of scientists has decided to ignore the scientific method and chase dreams of fame. With that fame, they hope to dig deep into our pockets and reap the benefits of their poor workmanship. It is most evident from the examples given that these scientists, who have seemingly reversed scientific evolution, no longer care for true science and the scientific method, but rather are interested in personal glory.
Schlager, Neil, and Josh Lauer. Science and Its Times: Understanding the Social Significance of Scientific Discovery. Detroit: Gale Group, 2000. Print.
Dr. Michael Shermer is a Professor, Founder of skeptic magazine, and a distinguished and brilliant American science writer to say the least. In His book The Moral Arc: How Science Makes Us Better People he sets out to embark on the daunting task of convincing and informing the reader on sciences’ ability to drives the expansion of humanity and the growth of the moral sphere. Although such a broad and general topic could be hard to explain, Shermer does so in a way that is concise, easy to understand, and refreshing for the reader. This novel is riddled with scientific facts, data, and pictures to back up shermers claims about the history of science, humanity and how the two interact with one another.
Throughout centuries medical research has been conducted on animals. “Animals were used in early studies to discover how blood circulates through the body, the effect of anesthesia, and the relationship between bacteria and disease” (AMA 59). Experiments such as these seem to be outdated and actually are by today’s means, scientists now study commonly for three general purposes: (1) biomedical and behavioral research, (2) education, (3) drug and product testing (AMA 60). These three types of experiments allow scientists to gain vast amounts of knowledge about human b...
Some defining characteristics of science are precision, perseverance, and progression. For example the progression of medicine of AIDS. AIDS “is the final stage of HIV infection, and not everyone who has HIV advances to this stage. People at this stage of HIV disease have badly damaged immune systems, which put them at risk for opportunistic infections” (Aids.gov, 2014). Through science, medicines have been created to prevent the progression of this deadly disease. However, scientists have still
Well this too is controversial - but like animals is necessary in finding new medical therapies. There are rules, regulations and guidelines in place to protect individuals in these studies such as the Declaration of Helsinki, The Nuremberg Code, and The Belmont Report. The Nuremberg Code came about when American prosecutors confronted Nazi Regime physicians who tortured and murdered Jews and others for their own medical research. One outcome from this trial and others to follow was the Nuremberg Code - a set of ethical guidelines for human experimentation. "The first tenet of the code is very clear: 'The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.'" (Washington, 2012). These documents have had major influence on human medical research and the laws governing it in the United
In this essay I will outline and defend the argument for complete abolition of the use of animals in biomedical research. I will ultimately agree with Tom Regan’s claim that “the fundamental wrong is the system that allows us to view animals as our resources.” I will describe several important objections to Regan’s claim. However, I will show that none of these objections overcomes his central argument.