Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Professional responsibilities of biomedical scientists in public discourse
  1. U Schüklenk
  1. Correspondence to:
 Dr U Schüklenk
 Head, Division of Bioethics, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, Wits 2050, South Africa; udoudo-schuklenk.org

Abstract

This article describes how a small but vocal group of biomedical scientists propagates the views that either HIV is not the cause of AIDS, or that it does not exist at all. When these views were rejected by mainstream science, this group took its views and arguments into the public domain, actively campaigning via newspapers, radio, and television to make its views known to the lay public. I describe some of the harmful consequences of the group’s activities, and ask two distinct ethical questions: what moral obligations do scientists who hold such minority views have with regard to a scientifically untrained lay audience, and what moral obligations do mainstream newspapers and government politicians have when it comes to such views. The latter question will be asked because the “dissidents” succeeded for a number of years in convincing the South African government of the soundness of their views. The consequences of their stance affected millions of HIV infected South Africans severely.

  • HIV
  • AIDS
  • causes of AIDS
  • professional responsibilities of biomedical scientists
  • medical ethics

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Footnotes

  • * Medline search undertaken 14 Nov 2002.