Henrietta Lacks's cells have easily been the most important human cell line used in research in the last 70 years. HeLa cells have been sold by pharmaceutical and laboratory technology companies, creating millions or billions of dollars of revenue and have contributed to a huge host of medical advances including several vaccines. Their use has changed the course of medicine for the good. However, there was no informed consent from Henrietta or her family at the time the cells were taken. In fact, Dr. Gey, who took the original cell sample from Henrietta even initially lied and said they came from a woman named "Helen Lane." So clearly he knew that there was something unethical about his actions. Henrietta Lacks died from the aggressive cervical cancer that the cells were harvested from. She never knew how important her cells would become. Shockingly, her family was never informed about her contributions to science and medicine until the 1973, more than 20 years after the sample was taken, and they have never been compensated as owners of the cells. Henrietta Lacks and her family are finally getting some recognition, and her name is now attached to many programs that are designed to promote advancement of biomedical ethics and people from poorer communities in science and medicine. However, while the Johns Hopkins video deserves applause for acknowledging her importance, it smooths over the questions of informed consent and compensation for the use of her cells. Discuss biomedical ethics, the responsibility of researchers (and IRBs-explained) and the consequences of taking advantage of the poor and racial minorities (such as the Lacks family or the participants of the Tuskagee Syphillis experiment explained) Why might these instances create medical skepticism and distrust among exploited communities? Can we make good on these wrongs as we move forward into an increasingly promising era of genetic medicine and highly personalized care?
Henrietta Lacks's cells have easily been the most important human cell line used in research in the last 70 years. HeLa cells have been sold by pharmaceutical and laboratory technology companies, creating millions or billions of dollars of revenue and have contributed to a huge host of medical advances including several vaccines. Their use has changed the course of medicine for the good. However, there was no informed consent from Henrietta or her family at the time the cells were taken. In fact, Dr. Gey, who took the original cell sample from Henrietta even initially lied and said they came from a woman named "Helen Lane." So clearly he knew that there was something unethical about his actions.
Henrietta Lacks died from the aggressive cervical cancer that the cells were harvested from. She never knew how important her cells would become. Shockingly, her family was never informed about her contributions to science and medicine until the 1973, more than 20 years after the sample was taken, and they have never been compensated as owners of the cells.
Henrietta Lacks and her family are finally getting some recognition, and her name is now attached to many programs that are designed to promote advancement of biomedical ethics and people from poorer communities in science and medicine. However, while the Johns Hopkins video deserves applause for acknowledging her importance, it smooths over the questions of informed consent and compensation for the use of her cells.
Discuss biomedical ethics, the responsibility of researchers (and IRBs-explained) and the consequences of taking advantage of the poor and racial minorities (such as the Lacks family or the participants of the Tuskagee Syphillis experiment explained) Why might these instances create medical skepticism and distrust among exploited communities? Can we make good on these wrongs as we move forward into an increasingly promising era of genetic medicine and highly personalized care?
Step by step
Solved in 2 steps
