-----------------------------------------------
Lista: ibap (Fique atento: dicas no rodape!)
Mensagem enviada por: "Gustavo Amaral" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
----------------------------------------------
Coincidentemente recebi hoje a resenha que transcrevo abaixo. Ela traz
subjacente um dos pontos que me parecem básicos, mas ausentes no pensamento
jurídico geral na questão da saúde, algo que em inglês corresponde a
trade-off e que, na falta de correspondência em português, traduzo por
escolha disjuntivas ou caráter disjuntivo das escolhas.
Veja-se, pela própria resenha, que não obstante o desenvolvimento de uma
vacina contra a AIDS seja algo fundamental, que para o desenvolvimento da
vacina seja indispensável a realização de testes em seres humanos em larga
escala, esses testes trazem problemas jurídicos e sociais que não são nada
desprezíveis. No exemplo do teste da vacina, se a vida "está acima de
tudo", como poderia o Estado concordar em submeter centenas, talvez milhares
de pessoas ao risco efetivo de contaminação (para que o teste funcione, é
necessário que haja condutas de risco e um grupo de comparação, estudado,
mas que ou recebe placebo ou nada recebe).
Gustavo Amaral
LAW JOURNAL ARTICLE ABSTRACTS AND SUMMARIES
------------------------------------------------------------
1. DOMESTIC AIDS VACCINE TRIALS: ADDRESSING THE
POTENTIAL FOR SOCIAL HARM TO THE SUBJECTS OF HUMAN
EXPERIMENTS
Philip A. Leider
California Law Review
University of California Boalt Hall
http://simon592-4.law.berkeley.edu/
July 2000, vol. 88, pg. 1185
http://www.law.berkeley.edu/journals/clr/library/leider01.html
REF: ULRP10000315
ABSTRACT:
In 1998, the FDA approved the first large-scale human
trials of a candidate AIDS vaccine in our nation's
history. While the legal issues raised by these trials
are manifold, the academic literature has focused
almost exclusively on the potential for mass tort
liability and the resulting hesitancy of biotech and
pharmaceutical firms to enter the field. This Comment
argues that another issue of vital concern demands
attention: the potential for social harm to the human
subjects of AIDS vaccine trials. After providing an
overview of the current epidemiology of HIV/AIDS and
explaining why a safe, effective AIDS vaccine
represents the best way to control the pandemic, this
Comment analyzes the scientific and social obstacles
to production of such a vaccine. In order to know
whether a candidate AIDS vaccine is truly effective,
researchers will have to test the product in
HIV-negative volunteers at high risk of infection.
Since these volunteers may subsequently test positive
for HIV on standard blood tests, they will be
vulnerable to discrimination on that basis in such
areas as employment, insurance, immigration, and
incarceration. Moreover, by participating in vaccine
trials, volunteers will be marking themselves as
people at high risk of HIV infection, another basis
for disparate treatment. Researchers have suggested
that federal disability discrimination law may afford
protection against research-related social harms.
Through close analysis of the Americans with
Disabilities Act of 1990 and the Supreme Court's
decision in Bragdon v. Abbott, this Comment
demonstrates that optimistic reliance on federal
disability law is misplaced. The unique issues raised
by domestic AIDS vaccine trials must be addressed in
their own right. The Comment accordingly concludes
with a broad range of legislative and regulatory
proposals to protect trial participants and advance
the AIDS vaccine research agenda.
-----------------------------------
Dicas:
1- Dúvidas e instruções diversas procure por Listas em:
http://www.pegasus.com.br
2- Pegasus Virtual Office
http://www.pvo.pegasus.com.br
