Showing posts with label bioethics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label bioethics. Show all posts

Thursday, 5 February 2015

Oxford bioethics - Ethox Centre Visiting Scholarship

Caroline Miles Visiting Scholarships - The Ethox Centre - University of Oxford
DEADLINE: 17th April 2015


The Caroline Miles Visiting Scholarships, funded by the Ethox Foundation, are awarded annually to post-doctoral or early-career researchers to enable them to spend up to a month at the Ethox Centre working on a topic relating to one of the Centre's four main research areas: clinical ethics; research ethics; global health bioethics; or population health ethics.

The deadline for this year's call is: 17 APRIL 2015

For more information about the scheme and the application procedure please visit the Ethox website at http://www.ethox.ox.ac.uk/


Thursday, 20 November 2014

Request for bioethics books for library at American University in Beirut


The Salim El-Hoss Bioethics and Professionalism Program at the American University of Beirut Faculty of a medicine and Medical Center  is currently building a Bioethics Library to be made accessible to colleagues and students in the Region where there is a dearth of such books and references.

At SHBPP have no funds to buy books for the library and we are thus seeking generous book donations on bioethics, research ethics, public health ethics, clinical ethics, humane medicine, medical professionalism, etc.

It would be great if you can be part of this endeavor and donate books/bioethics reports, etc. for this purpose.
All books will be indexed and references published online with acknowledgements.
If you have colleagues/institutions who would be interested in being part of this, I would really appreciate your help in disseminating this message.
We would appreciate sending hard copies to the snail mail address below.
Many thanks in advance,
Thalia

Thalia Arawi, PhD
Founding Director,
Salim El-Hoss Bioethics & Professionalism Program (SHBPP)
Clinical Bioethicist
Vice Chair, Medical Center Ethics Committee
American University of Beirut & Medical Center
Faculty of Medicine
P.O.BOX 11-0236
Riad El-Solh 1107 2020
Beirut-Lebanon



Friday, 29 August 2014

Phd funding in ethics of animal to human diseases

The chair group Philosophy at Wageningen University, The Netherlands, is seeking applications for a PhD position (fully employed) for a study on ETHICAL ISSUES IN RELATION TO PREVENTION OF ZOONOSES 

Zoonoses - infectious diseases that may spread from animals to humans - are one of the great challenges to global public health. Some important zoonoses such as avian influenza, Q-fever, MRSA, and BSE find their origin in livestock, and protection against these diseases will also affect food production. Certain infections however also spread from companion animals or wild animals to humans (toxoplasmosis, Lyme, etc.). A variety of measures can be taken to reduce the risk of zoonoses: extra hygienic measures in farms and food production, vaccination of animals, administration of antibiotics to infected animals, prophylactic use of antibiotics, isolation of farms, and the culling or hunting of animals that are sick, exposed, or otherwise risk spreading infection. 

Societal debates about these issues often focus on the easily polarized conflict between safeguarding public health versus serving the interests of agriculture and livestock farming. Although this conflict cannot be ignored, such a conceptualization easily obscures other dimensions of the risk of zoonoses. Other values and actors are at stake as well. Values like animal welfare and integrity, biodiversity, and environmental values, and actors like citizens (who consume meat and dairy products, and often appreciate living close to nature), food producers, and government. Moreover, a highly polarized debate may create obstacles to finding policies that are reasonable and fair to all stakeholders.

In this project we analyze a number of ethical issues in relation to the prevention and control of zoonoses. The general research question is how we as a society can responsibly deal with the risks of zoonoses. The emphasis is on dealing with infection risks from animal husbandry. The project includes an inventory of dilemmas in different contexts (health care, infectious disease control, livestock farming and nature conservation), an analysis of responsibilities of stakeholders, and a series of practical ethical case discussions. The project will be designed in such a way that it can take emerging cases of zoonoses into account. A more general theme will be how far we should go in eliminating risks. How should we weigh protection against risk reduction against other values, such as privacy, animal welfare and integrity, and a viable and sustainable farming?

Dilemmas concerning the prevention of zoonoses also raise a number of more theoretical questions in ethics, for example concerning the relationship between collective societal responsibility and responsibilities of individual parties (companies, consumers, farmers, hunters); the question how to deal with ethical dilemmas in non-ideal conditions (e.g. the - rapidly increasing - global demand for meat and animal production); and questions concerning the desirability and feasibility of overcoming conflicting interests through ethical reflection and deliberation. The project specifically aims at interaction with such fundamental questions.

WE ASK
- Master's degree in philosophy or applied ethics, with special interest in human and animal bioethics.
- Very good study results.
- Affinity with interdisciplinary research, particularly combining philosophical and empirical approaches
- Good writing and presentation skills in English; knowledge of the Dutch language is an advantage.
- An interest in assisting in teaching activities.

WE OFFER
We offer you fulltime employment (38 hours a week) for 18 months with a possible extension of 30 months after positive evaluation. The gross salary is € 2.083,- per month in the first year and increases to € 2.664,- per month in the fourth year. (based on fulltime employment). In addition, we offer a holiday bonus of 8% and an end-of-the-year bonus of 8.3% of your annual salary.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
For more information please contact Professor Marcel Verweij (marcel.verweij@wur.nl>).

APPLICATION
You can apply till 15 September 2014 (extended deadline). Candidates should upload the following information on the website https://www.wageningenur.nl/en/vacancy/PHD-Ethical-Issues-in-relation-to-prevention-of-zoonoses-2.htm
- Letter of motivation
- CV, including GPA (average grades) in your last study
- Two reference letters
- A (maximum 600 words) text in which you explain your vision on this topic and reflect on philosophical questions that you consider to be important in the study.

PHILOSOPHY @ WAGENINGEN UNIVERSITY
The Chair Group Philosophy at Wageningen University works on ethical and other philosophical issues in relation to the Wageningen domains of healthy food and living environments. In these domains we have research projects in animal and environmental ethics, public health ethics, and responsible innovation. Projects often involve cooperation with societal actors like governments, public health authorities, and research institutes like the RIVM (National Institute for Public Health and the Environment).http://www.wageningenur.nl/en/Expertise-Services/Chair-groups/Social-Sciences/Philosophy-Group.htm

The Chair Group is embedded within the section Communication, Philosophy and Technology: Centre for Integrative Development in the Department of Social Sciences, Wageningen University.

Thursday, 19 June 2014

Oxford University Bioethics Job Opportunity

University of Oxford

Senior Researcher (Associate Professor) in Medical Ethics

University of Oxford - NDPH

Old Road Campus, Headington, Oxford
The Ethox Centre is seeking to appoint a Senior Researcher (Associate Professor) in Medical Ethics to lead the development of a major new programme of research in one of its four priority research areas: clinical ethics, research ethics, population health ethics, or global health ethics and to take a leading role in the organisation and provision of teaching and assessment of students in medical ethics across the clinical ethics curriculum.
The Ethox Centre is an internationally recognised multidisciplinary bioethics research centre and is a vibrant and intellectually exciting place to work. It is expected that you will play a senior management and strategic leadership role, including the mentoring of early career researchers, generating significant research funding and developing partnerships to enhance the centre’s growing international reputation.
You will hold a relevant PhD/DPhil, have significant post-qualification experience and have an outstanding international reputation for research in one or more of the Ethox Centre's priority research themes. You will have an excellent publication record, ambitious research plans and a strong track record in attracting externally funded research. Excellent leadership, people management skills and interpersonal skills are essential. You will have the ability to teach ethics to medical students and have demonstrable expertise in supervising research students. A willingness to travel in the UK and internationally is also essential for this role.
It is anticipated that suitably qualified candidates will be offered an Associate Professor title at the University of Oxford.
The post is offered full-time for a fixed-term of 5 years and is based at the Old Road Campus, Headington, Oxford.
The closing date for applications is 12.00 noon on 28 July 2014.

Tuesday, 17 June 2014

Post-doc: political philosophy and bioethics: Kiel, Germany

Campus Kiel
 
Position in political philosophy/theory and bioethics
Institute of Experimental Medicine,
Emmy Noether-Research Group „Political philosophy and bioethics“, University of Kiel
Duration and Starting Date: two years, starting immediately. Salary depending on qualifications (TV-L 13 50% or 100%).
A full-time post-doc position is available in the Emmy Noether-Research Group „Political philosophy and bioethics“, which is funded by the German Research Council (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, DFG) and is situated at the University of Kiel, Institute of Experimental Medicine (Prof. Dr. Alena Buyx).  Political philosophy has informed bioethical debates for several decades, for example in the discussions about the just allocation of health care resources. The Emmy Noether Research Groups looks across a number of issues and discussions in bioethics and examines how concepts and theories of political philosophy have been used to build arguments for particular policy applications in bioethics, and whether this has happened in a consistent way. Exemplary fields of inquiry are theories of justice and priority setting in medicine and health care; normative justifications of public health interventions; health, healthcare and global justice; and solidarity in contemporary bioethics.
Post-doctoral candidates should have completed, or be close to the completion of, a doctorate in political theory/political philosophy, bioethics or a related discipline and should have proven potential to conduct and publish research at an international level. Post-doctoral candidates’ research should fall within the group’s main areas of work. However, other projects will be considered, provided they are compatible with the group’s general focus, namely an analysis of theories of political philosophy in the context of bioethics and their application to practical bioethical questions.
All candidates must have strong analytical skills as well as a demonstrated interest in interdisciplinary and teamwork. Fluency in English is essential; (passive) knowledge of German would be an asset.
Applications of women are specially invited; in the case of similar qualifications, competence and specific achievements, women will be considered on preferential terms, within the framework of the legal possibilities. Candidates with disabilities with equivalent qualifications will be given preference. Weekly working time is currently 38 hours and 50 minutes. Positions are temporary and project-based, with longest possible duration of three years.
Please send your application (cover letter, a 2/3 page research project proposal, CV, two writing samples (not more than 5,000 words, can be excerpts), and contact details for two references IN ONE FILE) to a.buyx@iem.uni-kiel.de with Ref.-No. 688.209.CK. Closing date is 2014-07-11.

Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein
Dezernat Personal | Recruiting Center

Friday, 28 June 2013

Lectureship in Bioethics & Society - King's College London

Job title                               Lecturer in Bioethics & Society  
Department/division     Department of Social Science, Health & Medicine            
Job ref                                  A6-7/DAF/617/13-JT      
Closing date                       28-Jul-2013

Summary            
We seek to appoint to a lectureship in Social Science, Health & Medicine (Bioethics & Society), to act as Assistant Director in our new MA in Bioethics & Society and to contribute to our undergraduate and postgraduate teaching.

Applicants should have a strong background in sociology, anthropology, philosophy or a cognate discipline; and a specialism relevant to bioethics. Applicants must have a completed doctorate, a developing research strategy, evidence of a developing record of high quality publications, and relevant teaching experience.

Details 
The person appointed will be expected to play a key role in the management of the MA in Bioethics & Society and lead or contribute to taught modules at both undergraduate and postgraduate levels. As Assistant Director of the MA programme, the person appointed will be expected to engage in active marketing and recruitment activities, both nationally and internationally; management of admissions, communication with students; and planning, organization and delivery of the taught programme.

Experience or familiarity with the academic environment in the UK is an advantage. A commitment to collegiality is essential, as is the ability and willingness to engage in constructive dialogue with medical and biomedical researchers and practitioners, and with policy makers.

For an informal discussion of the post please contact Professor Ilina Singh via email at ilina.singh@kcl.ac.uk

Salary                    The appointment will be made, dependent on relevant qualifications and experience, within the Grade 6/7 scale, currently £33,654 to £48,264, per annum, inclusive of £2,323 London Allowance, per annum.
Post duration    Fixed-term contract for 3 years.
Contact                To apply for the post, please click on the ‘Further details’ link below to open the job pack. The job pack contains detailed instructions on how to make your application. Please ensure that you follow the instructions carefully, as incomplete or incorrect applications may not be considered. All correspondence MUST clearly state the job title and reference number A6-7/DAF/617/13-JT.
Further details  Please see related Word document


Department of Social Science, Health and Medicine
Room K4L.21 King's Building | School of Social Science and Public Policy | King’s College London | Strand | London WC2R 2LS
Tel: +44(0)20 7848 7062


The Sunday Times 'Best University for Graduate Employment 2012-13'

Wednesday, 5 June 2013

Nuffield Council on Bioethics - Forward looking topics - background papers

Thursday, 23 May 2013

Wellcome Trust expands funding streams in the humanities and social sciences




WellcomeTrust expands funding streams in the humanities and social sciences

22 May 2013

The Wellcome Trust today announces the expansion of three funding streams to enable a wider range of research applications from the humanities, the social sciences and the arts.
Over the past five years, we have built on our long-standing focus on the history of medicine and biomedical ethics by enabling scholars from across the humanities and social sciences to apply for funding.
From today, all three of our funding streams in the humanities and social sciences will be expanding, with new opportunities for a wide variety of research proposals.
Applications to the Medical Humanities funding stream will no longer be limited to those that are 'historically grounded'. The stream now seeks to encourage bold and intellectually rigorous research that uses a range of methods and sources to explore the social, historical and cultural dimensions of health, medicine and disease. We believe that these broad approaches will not only help to illuminate our perceptions of health and illness in the past and present, but also serve to shape the practice of medicine and experiences of health in the future.
The Society and Ethics programme supports research that examines the social and ethical aspects of biomedical research and health, with the aim of addressing tractable, real-world problems. We remain committed to research informing the ethical dilemmas arising from biomedical or health research, healthcare practices, and health interventions. Our expansion of the programme reflects the recognition that broader research on the social, economic and cultural factors that influence biomedical research and health is essential to help meet ourstrategic challenges.
The Research Resources scheme now underpins research across the wider medical humanities and social sciences by supporting cataloguing and preservation projects in libraries and archives in the UK and Ireland. By improving access to significant collections of printed books, documents, film and photographic material, we aim to ensure important research resources are both well-known and well-used.

Thursday, 25 April 2013

King's College London Master's Programmes in bioethics or health justice


Department of Social Science, Medicine & Health 
King’s College London

POSTGRADUATE BURSARIES 2013-14
The Department of Social Science, Health & Medicine invites applications from candidates wishing to pursue Masters programmes, starting from September 2013:
MA BIOETHICS & SOCIETY
The MA in Bioethics & Society is a new postgraduate programme that is jointly taught with the Centre of Medical Law and Ethics at King’s. The programme gives particular emphasis to addressing bioethical questions in ways that integrate conceptual and normative analysis with empirical research. Students will also study the history and sociology of bioethics and have the opportunity to obtain training in empirical research methods.
MSc GLOBAL HEALTH & SOCIAL JUSTICE
This interdisciplinary and novel Master’s programme is designed to develop a new generation of thinkers and policy makers that have high level skills in the critical analysis of the social and political determinants of health and its inequalities in a global context as well as abilities to identify and provide normative arguments about the underlying ethical frameworks and conflicts.  The programme includes two core modules including Critical Global Health and Global Health Ethics as well as a dissertation.
BURSARIES
One award for one full-time student is available per programme. Each award will provide £2000 toward tuition fees.
The bursaries will be awarded on academic merit. All students applying for full-time study are eligible, including UK, EU and Overseas students. 
There is no separate application procedure. All fully completed applications received by midnight on the 31st July will be considered for the bursaries. Applications must have been uploaded to or received by the Postgraduate Admissions Portal by the due time and date. The successful candidate will be notified no later than 14th August. Payments will be made in October and January.
Further bursaries are available for the MSc Medicine, Science & Society, MSc Gerontology, MA/MSc Ageing & Society and the MA Public Policy & Ageing offered by the Department.
FURTHER INFORMATION
MA in Bioethics & Society: Prof Ilina Singh (Ilina.singh@kcl.ac.uk)
MSc in Global Health & Social Justice: Dr Sridhar Venkatapuram (sridhar.venkatapuram@kcl.ac.uk)

Tuesday, 18 December 2012

Erasmus Mundus bioethics MA scholarships and fellowships


ERASMUS MUNDUS MASTER OF BIOETHICS
SCHOLARSHIPS AVAILABLE FOR STUDENTS AND SCHOLARS
This particular Master's program exists since 2000 and is organized by the KU Leuven (Belgium), Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen (the Netherlands) and the Università degli Studi di Padova (Italy). The main objective of the Master of Bioethics is to train highly qualified students for research work or professional activities in the interdisciplinary field of bioethics, a field that is increasingly confronted with different moral questions and dilemmas. It approaches bioethics from an international perspective, paying special attention to European philosophical traditions in this area. More information on the program is available on our website www.masterbioethics.org.
We are pleased to inform you that due to the grant of the Erasmus Mundus label we are able to offer scholarships for students for the academic year 2013-2014 (Category A and B scholarships).
For more information on the different scholarships please refer to http://med.kuleuven.be/Faculteit_Geneeskunde/english/borders/erasmus-mundus-bioethics/fellowships .
The online application procedure is available on our website under the submenu ‘Application’ http://med.kuleuven.be/Faculteit_Geneeskunde/english/borders/erasmus-mundus-bioethics/how-to-apply.
Please be sure to:
  1. Fill in the preregistration form for students and send this preregistration form + a letter of motivation by e-mail tomasterbioethics@med.kuleuven.be
  2. Fill in the online application form athttp://www.kuleuven.be/application/
Due to the grant of the Erasmus Mundus label we are also able to offer scholarships for visiting scholars for a stay at one of the partner universities for a period of minimum 2 weeks and maximum three months. Visiting scholars may be either junior scholars involved in completion of a PhD. dissertation, post-doctoral scholars or professors. Please visit our website www.masterbioethics.org for more information.
The deadline for application is January 15th, 2013.

Monday, 17 December 2012

Brocher Fondation: call for visiting researchers, symposia and workshops



http://www.brocher.ch/en/calls-for-proposals/


The Brocher Foundation is located on the shores of the Geneva Lake, in Hermance (Geneva - Switzerland).

The Brocher Foundation residencies last between one and four months. They give researchers the opportunity to work at the Brocher Centre on projects on the ethical, legal and social implications for humankind of recent medical research and new technologies. Every month a dozen of visiting researchers live and concentrate on their research project at the Foundation.

The Brocher Foundation offers to successful applicants an accommodation in the domain of the Brocher Foundation and work space with all facilities.

Developing a research project involving cooperation with a Swiss university, a European university, a governmental or non- governmental will be considered as an asset.

A researcher can apply with other researchers to work on a collaborative project.

For further information about the Brocher Foundation please visit our website: www.brocher.ch  

Topics of the Year 2014

Among the following disciplines:
  • Bioethics
  • Medical Anthropology
  • Health Economics
  • Health Policy
  • Health Law
  • Philosophy of Medicine and Health
  • Medical Humanities
  • Social Science Perspectives on Health
  • Medical Ethics
  • History of medicine
  • Why Apply?

  • Write a book, articles, an essay, a monograph or your PhD thesis in a peaceful environment
  • Have the opportunity to meet other researchers from different disciplines and countries
  • Have the opportunity to meet experts from numerous International Organizations & Non- Governmental Organizations based in Geneva (WHO, WTO, WIPO, UNHCR, ILO, WMA, ICRC, ...) 
Proposals of the following topics are notably welcomed:
  • Equitable access to medical care
  • Biobanks
  • Biosecurity and Dual Use Dilemmas
  • Clinical Trials and Research on Human Subjects
  • Genetic testing and screening
  • Health Care Reform
  • Nanotechnology
  • Neglected diseases


Calls for proposals


The Brocher Foundation launches every year two calls for proposals. One for the visiting positions and one for the workshops and symposia.

Next dates:


Visiting researchers 2014:


Call: Mid-November 2012
Deadline: Mid-January 2013


Symposia & Workshops 2014:


Call: Mid-January 2013
Deadline:  Mid-March 2013


  • Pandemic planning
  • Reproductive technology
  • Stem Cells and Cell Therapy
  • Organ transplantation
  • Cyber Health
  • Neurosciences
  • Synthetic 































Friday, 12 October 2012

The murky business of clinical trials in India.


2 articles from LIVE MINT.  You can find them both here. 

10 October 2012


Clinical trials: Regulating chaos

The first in a two-part series examining the opaque world of clinical trials in India

Lata Mehra’s experience exposes the gaps in both regulation and enforcement in clinical trials, which, in some instances, have caused deaths, in addition to violating fundamental human rights. Photo: Akhil Hardia/ Mint
A hospital in Indore has been able to get away with unethical medical trials in which 32 people have died over five years, according to the state government. This despite several investigations, a state government ban and Supreme Court strictures—a classic example of the lawless nature of the clinical trial business in India.
Lata Mehra, who works in a government-run healthcare centre, was desperate when doctors told her in 2009 that she would be on medication for the rest of her life after a heart attack. The monthly medical bill, a little less than half her salary of `1,000 per month, would leave her with enough to just cover food and rent.
Then, Anil Bharani, a professor of medicine at the state-run Maharaja Yashwantrao Hospital in Indore, offered the 47-year-old a dream deal that he called a “company plan”. The `1,300 a month plan would pay for the drugs and also reimburse Mehra for transportation.
What Mehra did not know was that the “company plan” was part of an unauthorized drug trial of anticoagulants. Nor was she aware that Bharani and some of his colleagues were already being investigated by the state government over allegations of misconduct in clinical trials, an investigation that eventually led to the banning of the trial by the Madhya Pradesh government in October 2010.
Regardless, Bharani continued the trials despite the ban, and Mehra unknowingly became a test case for the drugs.
Lata Mehra. Photo: Akhil Hardia/Mint
The ban was imposed after it was uncovered that informed consent was not taken, and the patients subjected to clinical trials included newborns, children, pregnant women and mentally challenged persons.
The state followed up with more action, and in January barred Bharani and another doctor from conducting trials, and pulled up 12 other doctors at Maharaja Yashwantrao Hospital and 78 other private doctors for refusing to cooperate in the investigation.
That too hasn’t stopped the trials.
Bharani and officials at the hospital declined comment.
The Indore case highlights glaring gaps in regulation and enforcement in India’s rapidly growing clinical trial industry. A 2011 Associated Chambers of Commerce and Industry of India report put the value of the business at `8,000 crore, or $1.8 billion.
On Monday, the Supreme Court turned the spotlight on the business of clinical trials, when it threatened to impose a blanket ban on clinical trials across the country if the Union government didn’t act. The court has given the Union health ministry a month to provide the apex court with information on deaths, compensation and general practices when new drugs are tested on Indians.
“We can even issue a one-line direction that all these clinical trials which affect many people must stop forthwith,” justices R.M. Lodha andA.R. Dave said, hearing public interest cases dealing with the incidents at the Indore hospital.
The court’s order has once again drawn attention to India’s inadequate regime to regulate such trials. Not all clinical trials run in India violate norms, yet, Mehra’s experience exposes the gaps in both regulation and enforcement in clinical trials, which, in some instances, have caused deaths, in addition to violating fundamental human rights.
Government apathy
Mehra was more than happy with the “company plan” until her neighbour Mangilal Shreevas died suddenly, in early 2012.
“He was also a heart patient covered under the same ‘company plan’ at the same hospital and under the same doctor,” said the healthcare worker. “We took the same pills and we went to the hospital together for check-ups. After Mangilal’s death, his wife wanted his medical case sheets to lodge a complaint, but the hospital refused. I was disturbed by this and wanted a different doctor to have a look at my case sheet.”
The rest of her story is similar to that of several such participants in unauthorized clinical trials who express reservations. The doctors refused to hand over the medical file, saying it was “hospital property” and took Mehra off the “plan”. The reimbursements were discontinued.
Meanwhile, in January this year, the state government gave two doctors, Bharani and Ashish Patel, a rap on the knuckles, telling them to refrain from conducting clinical trials for six months; it also fined 12 doctors `5,000 each for not cooperating with investigators.
The fines have not yet been paid, and despite the ban, the trials continue, according to petitioners Swasthya Adhikar Manch, an activist group and Dr Anand Rai, a whistle-blower who filed two separate public interest litigations (PILs) in February 2012 bringing the subject to the court’s attention.
So far, 32 people enrolled in various trials at Maharaja Yashwantrao Hospital have died between 2005 and 2010; the state government has attributed the deaths directly to the testing.
Bharani and Maharaja Yashwantrao Hospital are the targets of both a central probe by a parliamentary committee looking into irregularities in clinical trials across the country, as well as a state level investigation of ethical violations in 94 clinical trials conducted at the hospital.
Judicial activism
Mounting evidence prompted the Supreme Court to step in. Hearing the PILs on the Indore trials, the same two-judge bench of the Supreme Court came down hard on the government and said on 17 July: “There has to be some sense of responsibility (on the part of the government). Human beings are being treated as guinea pigs. This is unfortunate.”
Meanwhile, the ethical committees that were supposed to have overseen the trials continue to function, said Amulya Nidhi, an Indore-based public health activist belonging to the Swasthya Adhikar Manch.
Complaints made to the Human Rights Commission—both state and national—are yet to yield results. In 2011, the joint director of health, Indore division, constituted a four-member committee that recommended the state impose a lifetime medical practice ban on each guilty doctor at Maharaja Yashwantrao Hospital and cancel registrations. That has had no impact.
Powerless government
As disturbing as the trials is the government’s apparent inability to do anything to regulate them.
In June 2011, the Madhya Pradesh economic offences wing (EOW) submitted a report on clinical trials at Maharaja Yashwantrao Hospital that established a conflict of interest, pointing out that pharmaceutical companies had sent principal investigators in several trials on “foreign trips and money was received (by doctors)”. Mint has reviewed a copy of the report.
The same month, a joint director in the state government submitted a second report advising the state government to initiate criminal proceedings against doctors for ignoring protocol.
The EOW report stated that 81 “serious adverse events” were reported in various clinical trials at Maharaja Yashwantrao Hospital.
Besides these cases, 1,833 children from the Chacha Nehru Bal Chikitsalaya (the paediatric hospital affiliated with MGM Medical College) and 233 mentally ill patients had been enrolled in clinical trials without any consent, according to documents submitted to the Supreme Court.
“As per government rules, guardians of mentally ill patients and children have to give an informed consent before they can enrol in trials,” said Nidhi of Swasthya Adhikar Manch, referring to the report.
In total, 12 doctors were named in the two reports. The EOW investigation listed Bharani (medicine), Salil Bhargava (superintendent), Ashoka Vajpayee (former superintendent), Pushpa Verma (dean), Hemant Jain (paediatrician) and Apoorv Puranik (neurologist), recommending that the Medical Council of India (MCI) initiate disciplinary action against them under Indian Council of Medical Research rules. Except for Verma, who maintained she was not involved in the drug trial controversy, none of the doctors were available for comment.
The “disciplinary measures”, including the `5,000 fine, have to be compared with the `5 crore that doctors earned for the trials, according to Swasthya Adhikar Manch’s PIL. Mint couldn’t independently verify this figure.
All but one of the doctors continue to practice medicine. Verma was promoted to the office of dean in January.
Over the past two years, victims and activists claim to have registered complaints at various forums, including the Central Vigilance Commission, EOW, the state police, the National Human Rights Commission, the medical education department, MCI, the Enforcement Directorate and the Central Drug Standard Control Organization. None of them seem to have had much effect.
Sarat Pandit, the joint director who submitted the 2011 report that recommends criminal proceedings against the doctors involved, blamed the delays on red tape and the involvement of too many government departments.
Victims languish
“Our mandate was to investigate the goings-on in Maharaja Yashwantrao Hospital and we did just that. Several irregularities in protocol and ethics were clearly established and we recommended action,” said Pandit. “The report is now lying with the government and it is up to them to act on it. The matter has now become sub judice. While several agencies are investigating the case, nothing is being done for the safety of people exposed to these doctors.”
There have been attempts to rally support for the victims. In January, Communist Party of India (Marxist) leader Brinda Karat sent a memorandum to then drug controller general of India, V.G. Somani, seeking action against the doctors.
“Families are upset and angry, and there is a clear groundswell. It is outrageous that Indians are being used as guinea pigs,” Karat said.
Mint has seen a copy of the letter.
The Madhya Pradesh state assembly has seen about 40 questions being asked in the past two years about trials, according to whistle-blower Rai.
“When RTI (Right to Information) replies were vague, we approached local politicians to raise the issue in the state assembly,” added Rai, who worked at Maharaja Yashwantrao Hospital and first exposed the trials. “Most of the information I have was collected by this route.”
The Union government has been trying to pursue the issue without much success.
“What happened in Indore was truly horrendous,” said Keshav Desiraju, additional secretary in the health ministry, who has been trying to get more information from the state government. “They have not responded to my queries.”
The parliamentary committee, which recently exposed the alleged nexus involving the drug regulator’s office, pharmaceutical companies and doctors, is to visit Indore to investigate the matter. Its report is expected to be tabled in the winter session of Parliament.
According to the health ministry, more than 1,500 people have died in clinical trials since 2008, a figure that’s contested by public health activists. According to documents presented in the Rajya Sabha, 2,163 people have died in India due to clinical trials since 2007.
“In Indore alone, trial subjects have died as recently as February, and this does not reflect in the government investigations. The whole subject is technical, and even when deaths occur during the trial, it is very difficult to attribute it directly to the drug tested. Several committees have pointed out that doctors do not maintain proper records of severe drug events,” added Nidhi of Swasthya Adhikar Manch.
No one has been compensated yet.
And what about those like Mehra, who participated in the clinical trial to obtain critical medication and then chose to be the whistle-blower?
“This is the cost of speaking up against doctors,” she said. “They have taken me off the company plan.”
vidya.k@livemint.com
This is the first in a two-part series on clinical trialsRead the second part here.


The dark underbelly of India’s clinical trials business

Incidents at Bhopal and Indore highlight irregularities and ethical violations in some trials

Protesters outside the Bhopal Memorial Hospital and Research Centre. Photo: Sayeed Farooqui/Mint
New Delhi: In 2004, doctors at the Bhopal Memorial Hospital and Research Centre (BMHRC), established exclusively for treating the victims of the 1984 gas leak, recruited unsuspecting survivors for clinical trials without their knowledge or consent; 14 participants died during the course of the trials.
Together with the episode in Indore’s Maharaja Yashwantrao Hospital (that Mint reported on 10 October), where 32 people have died in clinical trials between 2005 and 2010, this incident highlights irregularities and ethical violations in some trials conducted by clinical research firms and pharma companies—the dark underbelly of the booming clinical trial business in India.
In 2005, India introduced patent protection laws. Since then, it has become a global hub for clinical trials, drawing companies because of its ethnically diverse pool of potential test subjects, while bringing down research and development (R&D) costs by nearly 60% in phase II and III trials, according to lobby group Confederation of Indian Industry.
A phase II trial establishes the protocol for testing and a phase III one is the final testing prior to approval.
Regulatory failures have marred the clinical trial business in India, experts said, pointing to lapses in the functioning of so-called ethical committees that are required by law for each trial, contract research organizations (CROs) and the Central Drug Standard Control Organization (CDSCO).
A parliamentary panel in May found CDSCO to be in collusion with drug companies and doctors, and approving at least one drug every month without conducting clinical trials or seeking expert medical opinion. Concerns over the conduct of clinical trials prompted the same panel to look into the rapidly growing industry, and the international and domestic pharmaceutical companies sponsoring them.
“Many issues have been raised in Parliament—people being treated as guinea pigs, lack of informed consent and unattributed deaths during trials,” said Sanjay Jaiswal, a Lok Sabha member and a physician himself. “We are not against clinical trials. The issue is about how these trials are being done. Rules need to be followed.”
A report on this will be presented to Parliament in the winter session, he said.
Medical ethicists are concerned that the rapid growth— without trained manpower or a clear-cut regulatory framework —could be a “race to the bottom”, with global ramifications and not just confined to one country.
“What the media doesn’t get straight is that drug companies aren’t using poor Indians as guinea pigs for Americans,” said Arthur Caplan, a bioethicist at the New York University Langone Medical Center. “The more common thing is that say Vietnam competes with India to see if the companies will come and bring in their studies, bring in the doctors, bring some relief if the drug or vaccine works—maybe spend some money in these places, give a bribe or two to the local health ministry to recruit in the local mental hospital. So, if India tightens regulation, companies will just go to Vietnam. This is not just an India problem—it’s a global issue.”
A globalized market
International boundaries blurred substantially when the US food and drug administration (FDA) relaxed regulations allowing drug companies to submit results of foreign trials in applications for new drugs to be marketed in the US.
Between 1990 and 2008, the number of clinical trials conducted largely by US companies shot up about 24 times to 6,465 from 271, according to a 2011 article in Vanity Fair. The 20 largest US-based drug makers conduct about one-third of their phase III clinical trials outside the country, and a majority of their study sites also are elsewhere, according to American Medical News.
A large genetic pool, high-quality hospitals, English-speaking staff and low costs make India an attractive destination for pharma firms looking to conduct clinical trials.
According to CDSCO, there are an estimated 150,000 people enrolled in clinical trials in India. According to a 2011 Associated Chambers of Commerce and Industry of India (Assocham) report, nearly 100 domestic and multinational pharmaceutical companies are conducting trials in the country and the business is worth `8,000 crore.
Trials in countries such as India are cheaper to run: According to a 2008 Harvard Business Review article, tracking Indian test subjects costs between $1,500 and $2,000, (`79,500 and `1.06 lakh today), while in the US, it would cost $20,000.
When clinical trials are conducted ethically, India’s poor also stand to gain. With only 20% of India’s 1.2 billion people covered by health insurance and 35% living below the poverty line, the bulk of the population pays from the pocket for healthcare, according to health industry data provided by Assocham.
“A lot of patients don’t have access to healthcare otherwise,” said Irene Schipper, a researcher at the Netherlands-based Centre for Research on Multinational Corporations (SOMO). “But the problem, of course, is that when the clinical trial is over, they don’t have access anymore.”
Many clinical trials aren’t conducted ethically.
Schipper is concerned that tight regulatory policies in the US and the European Union (EU) appear to be driving high-risk trials to developing countries such as India, where rules or their enforcement may be lax. In 2008, SOMO released a report, Ethics for drug testing in low and middle-income countries, cataloguing a trend of offshoring risky clinical trials to developing countries that would be prohibited by ethics committees in the EU.
In one case, AstraZaneca Plc sponsored large, multi-centred placebo-controlled trials for Seroquel XR, an anti-psychotic drug for the treatment of patients with schizophrenia. The drug was tested against a placebo, which meant that roughly half the participants—all diagnosed schizophrenics—went without any treatment for the duration of the trial.
Due to the worsening of their conditions, 8.3% of the patients receiving the placebo required hospitalization. After 173 days of placebo treatment, one 25-year-old man committed suicide. “The consequences of this practice are serious,” Schipper said in the report. “According to the Declaration of Helsinki, this type of trial can never justify the use of a placebo because it involves withholding treatment from seriously ill patients risking irreversible harm. Nevertheless, the Dutch Medicines Evaluation Board approved Seroquel XR for the EU market.”
The multi-centre trials were conducted in India, Bulgaria, Poland, Russia and the Ukraine. While companies also continue to conduct such clinical trials elsewhere, “these days you’re seeing a lot more of these sorts of trials in India”, she said.
“At AstraZeneca, we take very seriously our responsibility towards the patients participating in our studies and our responsibility to deliver consistently high standards of ethical practice and scientific conduct in all our trials wherever they take place,” Andrew Higgins, a spokesperson for AstraZeneca, said in a statement.
“A placebo treatment does not imply a deficient standard of care. In accordance with the Good Clinical Practice rules, all patients in our clinical trials are provided with the same amount of care and are strictly monitored with the option to switch to another therapy or to be discontinued from the study where it becomes necessary,” he said.
Offshoring responsibility
Central to the growth of off-shoring clinical trials is the role of CROs—independent companies hired by sponsors to undertake clinical trials. Nearly 90% of trials in India are conducted by CROs, favoured by sponsors for their ability to form partnerships with local research organizations, recruit large numbers of participants and quickly conduct trials.
But medical ethicists worry this comes with a dark side. “To put it in a somewhat less polite way, the big company outsources the responsibility to the CRO. If something goes wrong, they say the CRO is completely responsible for this,” bioethicist Caplan said.
In 2011, CDSCO suspended the licence of Hyderabad-based CRO Axis Clinicals Ltd for recruiting illiterate women for a trial without obtaining proper consent. Following the incident, DCGI ordered an investigation into the operation of all 10 CROs in Andhra Pradesh.
Axis failed to respond to Mint’s repeated requests for comment.
“The problem with outsourcing to CROs is that oversight can be problematic,” said Schipper. Many CROs will divide tasks, such as administration, recruitment and research among various other CROs, making monitoring the process difficult for sponsors who are often based overseas, she said. “In our research, we’ve interviewed sponsors who have stopped using CROs entirely because they found that the cost of effectively monitoring them was greater than the money saved by hiring them.”
Caplan further worries that market incentives can drive CROs to complete trials at any cost. “There’s a conflict of interest when you hire a CRO, to act as a scientific and an ethical committee in India,” he said. “The sponsor wants the data—and wants it fast, and every day a study goes past its predicted date of completion, because they don’t have subjects enrolled, costs millions and millions of dollars—perhaps then they don’t continue to pay as much attention to informed consent or eligibility criteria.”
No functional regulatory system
Axis is not the first CRO in India to be facing hard questions: Quintiles, one of the largest global companies in the segment and based out of North Carolina, received a polite warning letter from DCGI for the clinical trials on Bhopal gas victims. “It should be noted that the studies conducted at BMHRC were approved by the Institutional Ethics Committee that was completely aware of the medical status of the patients visiting the hospital and participating in these trials,” Quintiles wrote in response to Mint’s inquiries.
Doctors, activists and researchers note that Indian ethics committees are often flawed. “Ethics committees are the front line regulators for clinical trials. If they were functional, they would be a major factor in preventing unethical trials,” said Amar Jasani, a researcher and trainer in the field of bioethics and public health. “The problem is the ethics committees are completely controlled by the institutions—they are not at all independent, the people on the committees are not trained, nor do they have the resources or independence to do their job.”
According to Jasani, Indian law allows for commercial ethics committees to be hired by the very CROs they are meant to monitor. “There’s a double conflict-of-interest,” he said. “They are governed by the CROs or the pharma companies. At the same time they are profit making—so they are more motivated by financial interest than (the safety of participants).”
While international standards governing clinical trials do exist, most are voluntary and lack regulatory teeth. The Delcaration of Helsinki, of which India is a signatory, says that potential research subjects need to be informed of the risks involved prior to participation, and reserve the right to refuse to participate.
Foreign drug authorities, such as FDA, have also made efforts to curtail unethical trials, by requiring that drug companies abide by certain guidelines. But their reach is limited. A 2010 report by the US Government Accountability Office found that FDA inspects fewer than 1% of clinical trials abroad, and that in many cases, it isn’t aware where clinical trials are being conducted until drug companies submit applications to market the new drug.
“There is no registry or international database—so I don’t think anyone knows what percentage of clinical trials are happening in the developing world. How many participants are men or women, old or young is also hard to know,” said Caplan. “We don’t have good information about what is really going on there, until there is a scandal, a problem or a death—but the overall picture is tough to know, because no one is responsible for monitoring it.”
The impact, though, is widespread: Nearly 80% of drug applications to FDA for marketing approval include tests done on foreign soil. With an FDA stamp of approval, many of the drugs end up being sold all over the world. “Seeing this as Americans exploiting Indians is not accurate,” said Caplan. “Drug companies are equally happy to sell to wealthy Indians. Drugs tested in these trials are eventually sold everywhere—studies in poor nations affect everyone.”
This is the concluding part of a two-part series on clinical trials in IndiaRead the first part here.