Informed Consent - Balance zwischen Patientenschutz und Forschungsinteressen

Forschungsethische Debatten haben sich in den letzten Jahren häufig der Frage gewidmet, ob Ausnahmen bei der strikten Forderung nach individueller Einwilligung des Patienten zulässig oder gar geboten sind. Einige Studiendesigns mit solchen Ausnahmeregelungen werden im Folgenden zur Diskussion vorgestellt

Empowerment or Engagement? Digital Health Technologies for Mental Healthcare

We argue that while digital health technologies (e.g. artificial intelligence, smartphones, and virtual reality) present significant opportunities for improving the delivery of healthcare, key concepts that are used to evaluate and understand their impact can obscure significant ethical issues related to patient engagement and experience. Specifically, we focus on the concept of empowerment and ask whether it is adequate for addressing some significant ethical concerns that relate to digital health technologies for mental healthcare. We frame these concerns using five key ethical principles for AI ethics (i.e. autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, justice, and explicability), which have their roots in the bioethical literature, in order to critically evaluate the role that digital health technologies will have in the future of digital healthcare

Global Ethics and Nanotechnology: A Comparison of the Nanoethics Environments of the EU and China

The following article offers a brief overview of current nanotechnology policy, regulation and ethics in Europe and The People’s Republic of China with the intent of noting (dis)similarities in approach, before focusing on the involvement of the public in science and technology policy (i.e. participatory Technology Assessment). The conclusions of this article are, that (a) in terms of nanosafety as expressed through policy and regulation, China PR and the EU have similar approaches towards, and concerns about, nanotoxicity—the official debate on benefits and risks is not markedly different in the two regions; (b) that there is a similar economic drive behind both regions’ approach to nanodevelopment, the difference being the degree of public concern admitted; and (c) participation in decision-making is fundamentally different in the two regions. Thus in China PR, the focus is on the responsibility of the scientist; in the EU, it is about government accountability to the public. The formulation of a Code of Conduct for scientists in both regions (China PR’s predicted for 2012) reveals both similarity and difference in approach to nanotechnology development. This may change, since individual responsibility alone cannot guide S&T development, and as public participation is increasingly seen globally as integral to governmental decision-making

First record of Ophelimus maskelli (Ashmead) (Hymenoptera: Eulophidae) and its parasitoid, Closterocerus chamaeleon (Girault) (Hymenoptera: Eulophidae), in Argentina

Se cita por primera vez de la Argentina la presencia de la avispa galícola exótica Ophelimus maskelli (Ashmead) (Hymenoptera: Eulophidae) y su parasitoide natural, Closterocerus chamaeleon (Girault) (Hymenoptera: Eulophidae) en Eucalyptus camaldulensis de la provincia de Buenos Aires. Ophelimus maskelli es una especie invasora de origen Australiano que ha sido reportada como plaga de los eucaliptos en numerosos países de Asia, Europa y América. Closterocerus chamaleon es un parasitoide exótico cuyo potencial como biocontrolador de O. maskelli está siendo evaluado en algunos países.The Eucalyptus gall wasp Ophelimus maskelli (Ashmead) (Hymenoptera: Eulophidae) and its parasitoid, Closterocerus chamaeleon (Girault) (Hymenoptera: Eulophidae) are reported for the first time from Argentina. O. maskelli is an invasive species of Australia that has been reported as a pest of eucalypts in many countries of Asia, Europe and America. C. chamaeleon is an exotic parasitoid whose potential to control O. maskelli is being evaluated in some countries.Facultad de Ciencias Naturales y Muse