Back to Annual Meeting

Back to Annual Meeting

APHA Scientific Session and Event Listing

Dianne Quigley, PhD Candidate, Religion, Syracuse University, 501 Hall of Language, Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY 13244, 315-443-3861, diquigle@syr.edu

This session seeks to promote a collaborative, stakeholder process of ethical review for groups of US health research investigations that are performed for a special problem research area. For example, in the 1990's, the federal agencies needed to respond to citizen investigations of massive radioactive contamination to communities and workers from nuclear weapons production. Millions of dollars for research investigations into the health impacts of nuclear contamination at Hanford, Fernald, Savannah River, Rocky Flats, Los Alamos and other sites were poured into expert-driven health studies throughout the decade. No review however was performed on the collective effort and its benefits to these exposed communities. Our “Collaborative Initiative on Research Ethics and Environmental Health” has since collected community, government and academic narratives on ethical reflections of the research performed at these sites. We are developing a compilation of these narratives to start an evaluation process of the ethics of the studies, particularly as they relate to responding to the health concerns of the communities and the ultimate benefits of these expensive studies to these communities. We will then use the compilation to promote a national ethical review of these health studies with all stakeholders who were involved in this. Such an ethical review process for special research problems is currently lacking in public health. Many funds can be expended on groups of studies that may have very little benefit to the affected populations, demoralizing communities who already suffered the ethical and health harms of severe environmental contamination.

Learning Objectives:

• (1)to review a case study of a special problem research area and how millions of dollars of research funding were spent nationwide by the federal government to try to deal with the problem of health impacts from radioactive contamination from nuclear weapons production.
• (2)to provide some follow-up on the impact of this funding to the affected populations after these investigations have ended.
• (3)to demonstrate the need for a collective ethical review of research efforts and findings after funding has been expended on a national research priority area, a process that currently does not exist.
• (4)to generate discussion amongst the session participants about the need to consider ethical review processes for special research problems.

Keywords: Research Ethics, Public Health Advocacy

Related Web page: www.researchethics.org

Presenting author's disclosure statement:

Any relevant financial relationships? No