View Full Version : bruvas is burnin'

Black Man
04-06-2007, 07:14 PM
The Tuskegee Experiment
From 1932-1972 600 low-income African-American males, 400 infected with syphilis are monitored for 40 years. Even though a proven cure (penicillin) became available in the 1950s, the study continues until 1972 with participants denied treatment. Perhaps as many as 100 died of syphilis during the study.

The study continued for decades after effective treatment became available. In some cases, when subjects were diagnosed as having syphilis by other physicians researchers intervened to prevent treatment.
Throughout the forty years of the study it was periodically reivewed by U.S. Health Service officials. In each case the study was extended based on the argument that stopping the study, while helping these individuals, would interfere with the benefits to medical science of studying this untreated disease (Jones, 1989). For a justification of the study by one of the researchers, see the following movie. The study was stopped by the U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare only after its existence was leaked to the public and it became a political embarrassment.
This study violated a number of ethical principles that should have applied to all human subjects research.
The study used disadvantaged, rural black men to study the untreated course of a disease that is by no means confined to that population. This places all of the burden of risk on that population when a much broader population benefits from the findings.
The study did not minimize risks to human subjects. In fact, it increased their risks. These subjects were deprived of demonstrably effective treatment in order not to interrupt the project, long after such treatment became generally available." (The Belmont Report, 1979)
The Tuskegee syphilis study is one of the most widely cited examples of research in which human subjects were not adequately protected. This study, and other similar studies provided the impetus for federal regulations that now restrict the treatment of human subjects in research.
In 1932 the American Government promised 400 men - all residents of Macon County, Alabama, all poor, all African American - free treatment for Bad Blood, a euphemism for syphilis which was epidemic in the county. Treatment for syphilis was never given to the men and was in fact withheld. The men became unwitting subjects for a government sanctioned medical investigation, The Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis in the Negro Male. The Tuskegee Study, which lasted for 4 decades, until 1972, had nothing to do with treatment. No new drugs were tested; neither was any effort made to establish the efficacy of old forms of treatment. It was a nontherapeutic experiment, aimed at compiling data on the effects of the spontaneous evolution of syphilis on black males. What has become clear since the story was broken by Jean Heller in 1972 was that the Public Health Service (PHS) was interested in using Macon County and its black inhabitants as a laboratory for studying the long-term effects of untreated syphilis, not in treating this deadly disease.
The Tuskegee Study symbolizes the medical misconduct and blatant disregard for human rights that takes place in the name of science. The studies principal investigators were not mad scientists, they were government physicians, respected men of science, who published reports on the study in the leading medical journals. The subjects of the study bear witness to the premise that the burden of medical experimentation has historically been borne by those least able to protect themselves.
The government doctors who participated in the study failed to obtain informed consent from the subjects in a study of disease with a known risk to human life. Instead, the PHS offered the men incentives to participate: free physical examinations, free rides to and from the clinics, hot meals on examination days, free treatment for minor ailments, and a guarantee that a burial stipend would be paid to their survivors. This modest stipend of $50.00 represented the only form of burial insurance that many of the men had. By failing to obtain informed consent and offering incentives for participation, the PHS doctors were performing unethical and immoral experiments on human subjects. From the moment the experiment begun, the immorality of the experiment was blatantly apparent.
Many critics of The Tuskegee Study draw comparisons to the similar degradation of human indignity in inhumane medical experiments on humans living under the Third Reich. How could such callousness happen outside Nazi Germany? To deny that race played a role in The Tuskegee Study is naive. All 600 subjects (399 experimentals and 201 controls) were black; the PHS directors and most of the doctors who studied them were white. Was The Tuskegee Study government sanctioned, premeditated genocide?
In July 1972, Jean Heller broke the story. Under examination by the press, the PHS was not able to provide a formal protocol for the experiment; in fact, one never existed. While it was obvious to the American public as a whole, PHS officials maintained that they did nothing wrong. By the time the story broke, over 100 of the infected men had died, others suffered from serious syphilis-related conditions that may have contributed to their later deaths even though penicillin, an effective treatment against syphilis, was in widespread use by 1946. On July 23, 1973, Fred Gray, a prominent civil rights lawyer, brought a $1.8 billion class action civil suit against many of those institutions and individuals involved in the study. Gray demanded $3 million in damages for each living participant and the heirs of the deceased. The case never came to trial. In December, 1974, the government agreed to a $10 million out of court settlement. The living participants each received $37 500 in damages, the heirs of the deceased, $15 000. Gray received nearly $1 million in legal fees. Had the subjects of The Tuskegee Study been taken advantage of? Although the survivors and the families of the deceased received compensation, no PHS officer who had been directly involved in the study felt contrition. No apologies were ever tendered; no one ever admitted any wrong doing. On the contrary, the PHS officers made it clear that they felt they were acting in good conscience. They felt betrayed by the government's failure to defend the study they commissioned. But as one survivor said "...I don't know what they used us for. I ain't never understood the study."

maestro wooz
04-08-2007, 07:05 PM

04-09-2007, 05:51 AM
i was gonna say where did u find this bollocks?

04-09-2007, 02:10 PM
who knows in this world but you can't think this is how the world works.

04-09-2007, 02:18 PM
That shit isent forgotten by those who know.

What you think they doing to us now?

Dirty Knowledge
04-10-2007, 05:08 PM
Wow what a sad thing to learn today.