Respond in full as a way to prepare for the 2nd assessment as in the assignment your Vx case will be graded. Try this time round to integrate some references, as again these will be required in your assignment case. Perhaps you can start with references for the ethical concepts you are discussing and/or references relating to the nature of the case.
Use the Vx Reports to learn from previous students as part of your assessment preparation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You are the chair of a research ethics committee. A team of researchers has submitted a research application for a research project into a new drug which they say is 70% likely to cure an acute life threatening disease (it kills sufferers within two months of contracting it). They say they know the chances of success from animal tests and previous tests with paid human volunteers.
They have previously asked the committee under a different chair for approval to take the drug to market based on the existing evidence but the proposal was turned down and they were asked to resubmit for approval of a double blind trial - the implication of this is that those in the trial who do not get the drug will die. Also, in a double blind trial neither the participants nor researchers know who is getting the drug and who is getting a placebo.
You have read the evidence and agree that there is a convincing case of a 70% likelihood of cure. You can also see that with further research this rate could be improved. However you are also mindful that in order to conduct further research, the double blind trial will certainly result in some participants dying, participants who may have thought they were receieving a potentially life saving drug.
The committee is undecided with equal numbers for and against.
What do you do?