The ethics of innovation for Alzheimer’s disease : the risk of overstating evidence for metabolic enhancement protocols [Separata] /

Medical practice is ideally based on robust, relevant research. However, the lack of disease-modifying treatments for Alzheimer’s disease has motivated “innovative practice” to improve patients’ well-being despite insufficient evidence for the regular use of such interventions in health systems trea...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Daly, Timothy (Autor), Mastroleo, Ignacio (Autor), Gorski, David (Autor), Epelbaum, Stéphane (Autor)
Formato: Capítulo de libro
Lenguaje:Inglés
Materias:
Aporte de:Registro referencial: Solicitar el recurso aquí
LEADER 02641naa a2200337 a 4500
003 AR-BaFLA
005 20221123151613.0
008 191113t2021 -us |||fs2|| 000 0 eng d
040 |a FLACSO Argentina  |c FLACSO Argentina  |b spa  |e rda 
041 0 |a eng 
100 1 |9 37431  |a Daly, Timothy  |e aut. 
245 1 4 |a The ethics of innovation for Alzheimer’s disease :   |b the risk of overstating evidence for metabolic enhancement protocols [Separata] /   |c Timothy Daly ... [y otros]  |h DIG 
300 |a pp. 223-237 
336 |2 rdacontent  |a Texto  |b txt 
337 |2 rdamedia  |a computadora  |b c 
338 |2 rdacarrier  |a Recurso el línea  |b cr 
504 |a incl. ref. 
520 |a Medical practice is ideally based on robust, relevant research. However, the lack of disease-modifying treatments for Alzheimer’s disease has motivated “innovative practice” to improve patients’ well-being despite insufficient evidence for the regular use of such interventions in health systems treating millions of patients. Innovative or new non-validated practice poses at least three distinct ethical questions: first, about the responsible application of new non-validated practice to individual patients (clinical ethics); second, about the way in which data from new non-validated practice are communicated via the scientific and lay press (scientific communication ethics); and third, about the prospect of making new non-validated interventions widely available before more definitive testing (public health ethics). We argue that the authors of metabolic enhancement protocols for Alzheimer’s disease have overstated the evidence in favor of these interventions within the scientific and lay press, failing to communicate weaknesses in their data and uncertainty about their conclusions. Such unmeasured language may create false hope, cause financial harm, undermine informed consent, and frustrate the production of generalizable knowledge necessary to face the societal problems posed by this devastating disease. We therefore offer more stringent guidelines for responsible innovation in the treatment of Alzheimer’s disease. 
650 4 |9 10121  |a ETICA MEDICA 
650 4 |9 23264  |a ALZHEIMER 
650 4 |9 13349  |a ENFERMEDADES MENTALES 
650 4 |9 4180  |a  ANALISIS DE PROTOCOLOS 
650 4 |9 12828  |a INNOVACION CIENTIFICA 
650 4 |9 13778  |a DEMENCIA 
690 |a BIOETICA 
700 1 |9 19323  |a Mastroleo, Ignacio  |e aut. 
700 1 |9 37432  |a Gorski, David  |e aut. 
700 1 |9 37433  |a Epelbaum, Stéphane  |e aut. 
773 |d New York : Springer, 2021  |t Theoretical medicine and bioethics  |g n. 41  |x 1573-1200 
942 |c ART 
999 |c 50457  |d 50457