Which of the Following Brought Increased Public Attention to the Problems with the IRB System?
The Institutional Review Board (IRB) is a critical component of the process of conducting research involving human subjects. The purpose of the IRB is to ensure that any research activity involving human participants is ethical and safe. However, recent years have seen growing concerns about the IRB system, with some experts questioning whether it is effective in safeguarding the interests of human participants.
There have been several incidents in recent years that have brought increased public attention to the problems with the IRB system. In this article, we will explore some of these incidents and the issues they have raised.
One of the most high-profile incidents involving the IRB system occurred in 2007, when Jesse Gelsinger, a patient with a rare genetic disorder, died as a result of a gene therapy trial. The trial was approved by the IRB, but subsequent investigations revealed that the researchers had not adequately disclosed the risks of the treatment to the participants.
This incident drew attention to the fact that the IRB system may not always be effective in ensuring that participants are fully informed about the risks of research interventions. It also highlighted the need for better regulation of the research industry in order to prevent similar incidents from occurring.
Another incident that raised concerns about the IRB system occurred in 2012, when a researcher from the University of Minnesota was found to have enrolled subjects in a clinical trial without obtaining adequate consent. The researcher had informed participants that the trial was being conducted for medical purposes, when in fact it was part of an experiment to test new technology.
This incident highlighted the need for more rigorous oversight of research activities, and led to renewed calls for greater transparency in the IRB system. It also underscored the importance of informed consent, and the need to ensure that participants fully understand what they are agreeing to when they participate in research studies.
In recent years, there have been several other incidents that have brought attention to the problems with the IRB system. These have included cases of fraud and misconduct, as well as concerns about the adequacy of the review process itself.
While the IRB system is certainly not perfect, it is important to remember that it is still playing a vital role in protecting the interests of human research participants. However, there is clearly a need for ongoing scrutiny and improvement in order to ensure that the system is as effective as possible.
In conclusion, there have been several incidents in recent years that have brought increased public attention to the problems with the IRB system. While the system is critical for ensuring the ethical and safe treatment of research participants, there is clearly room for improvement. It is our hope that continued attention to these issues will lead to a more effective and transparent IRB system in the future.
