What Price Better Health?: Hazards of the Research Imperative
The idea that we have an unlimited moral imperative to pursue medical research is deeply rooted in American society and medicine. In this provocative work, Daniel Callahan exposes the ways in which such a seemingly high and humane ideal can be corrupted and distorted into a harmful practice.
Medical research, with its power to attract money and political support, and its promise of cures for a wide range of medical burdens, has good and bad sides—which are often indistinguishable. In What Price Better Health?, Callahan teases out the distinctions and differences, revealing the difficulties that result when the research imperative is suffused with excessive zeal, adulterated by the profit motive, or used to justify cutting moral corners. Exploring the National Institutes of Health's annual budget, the inflated estimates of health care cost savings that result from research, the high prices charged by drug companies, the use and misuse of human subjects for medical testing, and the controversies surrounding human cloning and stem cell research, Callahan clarifies the fine line between doing good and doing harm in the name of medical progress. His work shows that medical research must be understood in light of other social and economic needs and how even the research imperative, dedicated to the highest human good, has its limits.
What people are saying - Write a review
We haven't found any reviews in the usual places.
the emergence and growth of
protecting the integrity of science
is research a moral obligation?
curing the sick helping the suffering enhancing
assessing risks and benefits
using humans for research
pluralism balance and controversy
doing good and doing well
advocacy and priorities for research
research and the public interest
Other editions - View all
abortion advocacy aging American Medical Association behavioral Behavioral Genetics Bioethics biological biomedical research biotechnology budget cancer child claim clinical Commission companies Congress cultural cure death debate developed countries disability disease drugs economic efforts embryo research England Journal enhancement ethical federal funds gene therapy genetic Genome goals of medicine governmental groups harm Harold Varmus hazardous human cloning Human Genome Project human subjects human-subject research important improve increase individual informed consent interest issue Journal of Medicine kind knowledge less lives means medical research ment moral Nuremberg Code patients percent pharmaceutical industry physicians political possible precautionary principle pressure principle priority setting problems profit protection public health reason recombinant DNA research imperative research priorities response risk-benefit risk-benefit analysis scientific scientists setting priorities simply social society standards stem cell research success technologies tion treatment University Press York