A Brief Summary On Skloot's Deception

Skloot's claim which is ,''the Deception was for his own benefit-he was withholding information because patients might have refused to participate in his study if they'd known what he was injecting.'' Skloot does have relevant and sufficient evidence to support her claim throughout the rest of the excerpt. Southham was injecting people with cancer out of his own paranoia fearing that cancer was contagious he decided to test his theory on 12 oblivious cancer patients by telling them he was checking their immune system . After his theory proved correct southham went to a prison in Ohio were he injected 150 prisoners who were aware of what he was injecting them with to test weather a healthy immune system would fight it off. Southham was deceiving his patients in order to fuel his study injecting over 600 people who most were unaware and some he told he was checking for cancer.his research was breaking the nuremburg code. The Nuremburg code was a code that stated that no person could be treated with
something the did not know without consent .Southham claimed that he did not know of such a code and defended his actions by stating that he was doing something that could benefit everyone. Southham was taken to court by the doctors he asked to inject their patients. Everyone agreeing that it was a dark day for the science field. Although it was not all Southhams fault.
In the text it states,"when Southham began injecting people with HeLa cells in 1994, there was no formal research oversight in the united states.Since the turn of the century, politicians had been introducing state and federal laws with hopes of regulating human experimentation, but physicians and researchers always protested. The bill was repeatedly voted down for fear of interfering with the progress of science, even though other countries-including, ironically, Prussia-had enacted regulations governing human research as early as 1891,'' The researchers them selves made it seem okay to test on a human without consent for the sake of science. southham stated he did it for everyone so what he was saying was its okay to harm one person for everyone else's benefit but if we asked that we would be crossing to a new territory of the value of one life compared to millions, but that was the counter argument southham
presented. In a interview a reporter asked Southham why,if the injections were as safe as he said why didn't he inject himself. Ironically he stated,"Lets face it ","there are relatively few skilled cancer researchers,and it seemed stupid to take even the little risk."Southham would not risk his own life for his research but other peoples lives are acceptable ? Doctors took to the Board of Regents where Southhams lawyer stated that if the whole profession is doing it, how can you call it 'unprofessional conduct ?' Southhams research really shined a spot light on how the law wasn't being enforced. In conclusion Southhams unethical and monstrous studies were not for the good of humanity but for the satisfaction of one power hungry man (go figure).Skloot claim was relevant and supported by the majority of the text.