Do scientists need strict ethics?
Scientists are not subject to strict ethical codes like lawyers or doctors etc. Many new discoveries have seriously bad effects on people and the environment. Isn't it about time science and tech were subjected to much tighter professional ethical controls?
As documentation of how scientists have falsified outcomes and proclaimed conclusions from false data comes to light in spite of media's biased leanings this question is important to examine.
It's more than what is pointed out in articles found in "The Top 10 Most Spectacularly Wrong Widely Held Scientific Theories" type posts. It is actual misconduct in areas of stem cell research, global warming theories, and HIV data.
I've read of some people making excuses for these dishonest scientists, but I believe that they should be held accountable legally, like lawyers and doctors are supposed to be in the eyes of the law. Dong-Pyou Han is one who was indicted. Indictments are unusual, but they should not be when scientists make declarations based on false information.
Irregularities in data are far more common in the scientific world than most are willing to admit and the ethics controls should go beyond academic circles. They should be dealt with by the law.
I totally agree and wrote a hub on it. They urgently need legal accountability. Many are greedy for profits and forget about the environment and people.
The actual altering of climate data to fit the climate models has been under-reported, as well as the suppression of contrary research papers. Those scientists have more faith in models than real data - and commit unethical acts to support the models
I would not say "restrict research for fear of what it might do" or "restrict research because it could have bad effects".
Instead, apply ethics to the research itself, such as not harming patients to get rather unimportant data or ensuring that the clinical trial patients who generate critical data are among the first to get access to the cure.
In the case of technology, apply ethics to its application - not taking away people's freedom and self determination or killing them.
by aka-dj22 months ago
A worldwide flood (like described by Noah's flood) is said to be part of many cultures folklore.Creationist proponents belive geological evidence "supports " such an event. Atheists (and others) do not. What...
by David Stillwell6 years ago
Are you concerned about global warming or do you feel it is more hype than fact?There is a lot of information available about global warming, almost as though there is too much information available. Does the...
by Sychophantastic3 years ago
These are results of a public policy poll:Q1 Do you believe global warming is a hoax, ornot?Do ................................................................... 37%Do not...
by Catherine Tally4 years ago
If the ethics of practicing medicine are to focus on the benefit of humanity at large, why are Big Pharma , biotech companies, and universities allowed to maintain long-held patents for ridiculous profits which...
by Ralph Deeds4 years ago
" ROCHESTER — IN 1982, polls showed that 44 percent of Americans believed God had created human beings in their present form. Thirty years later, the fraction of the population who are creationists is 46...
by Quilligrapher4 years ago
... from a bill drafted by Rep. Lamar Smith that would over ride peer review at the National Science Foundation (NSF) with a set of funding criteria chosen and overseen by Congress and he wants to use it as a model for...
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.