TAG ARCHIVES FOR public trust

10
May2019

The last few years have seen a growing call across the research enterprise to increase transparency around animal research—why we do it, why it’s important, and what it has accomplished. I also wonder whether there is another layer of transparency we ought to be promoting—namely, transparency about the ethical dimensions of animal research and its oversight. Specifically, how might being more open about the ethical issues and questions that are part of the day-to-day work of those involved in animal research serve our collective goals of educating and engaging the public; increasing their understanding, trust, and support for the animal research enterprise; and reframing the public conversation?  Read more

19
Apr2019

Past disregard for human rights in studies such as the Tuskegee experiment, has left some individuals (rightly so) with an inherit distrust of the clinical research process. Over time, increased regulatory oversight of the clinical research environment was put into effect to protect those who participate in research, particularly those who might be more vulnerable. But sometimes the regulations don’t keep up with developments in the modern research enterprise. Read more

29
May2018

As we wrap up Member Appreciation Month, PRIM&R would like to highlight some of our members—individuals who work daily to advance ethical research on a daily basis. Today, we highlight Connor Bryant, Research Coordinator at Liberty University in Lynchburg, VA. Mr. Bryant shared with us what has shaped his professional experience so far and how PRIM&R events and programs connect him to the larger research ethics community. Read more

21
May2018

On April 30, 2018, the EPA published in the Federal Register a proposed rule titled, Strengthening Transparency in Regulatory Science. The rule would prohibit the EPA from basing regulatory action on scientific studies for which the underlying raw data and models are not publicly available “in a manner sufficient for validation and analysis.” According to the notice, the proposed rule is “designed to increase transparency in the preparation, identification, and use of science in policymaking.” On its face, this sounds good; however, many in the scientific community are expressing deep concern that this proposed rule is actually a way for EPA to limit the types of science it can and will use in regulatory decision-making, to the detriment of environmental policy and the public’s health. Comments on the proposed rule are due May 30. Read more