RothmanK.J., “The Rise and Fall of Epidemiology, 1950–2000 A.D”. N Engl J Med1981; 304: 600–02.
2.
CannC.I.RothmanK.J., “IRBs and Epidemiologic Research: How Inappropriate Restrictions Hamper Studies”. IRB: A Journal of Human Subjects Research1984; 6(4):5–7; HersheyN., “IRB Jurisdiction and Limits in IRB Actions”. IRB: A Journal of Human Subjects Research1985; 7(2): 7–9; CannC.I.RothmanK.J., “Reply: Overcoming Hurdles to Epidemiologic Research”. IRB: A Journal of Human Subjects Research1985; 7(2); 9.
3.
JonasH., “Philosophical Reflections on Experimenting with Human Subjects”. Daedalus1969; 98: 219–45.
4.
I. de Sola Pool, “The New Censorship of Social Research”. Public Interest1980; 59: 56–88; PatulloE.L., “Who Risks What in Social Research”. IRB: A Journal of Human Subjects Research1980; 2(3): 1–3, 12; RobertsonJ., “The Scientist's Right to Research: A Constitutional Analysis”. So Cal L Rev1979; 51: 1203–81.
5.
GibbsR.A.CaskeyC.T., “The Application of Recombinant DNA Technology for Genetic Probing in Epidemiology”. Ann Rev Pub Health1989; 10: 27–48.
6.
MacIntyreA., “Risk, Harm, and Benefit Assessments as Instruments of Moral Evaluation”. In: Beauchamp, Eds. Ethical Issues in Social Science Research.Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press; 1982: P. 175.
7.
Id. at 177.
8.
DworkinG., “Must Subjects be Objects?” In Beauchamp, Eds. Ethical Issues in Social Science Research.Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press; 1982: Pp. 246, 247–48.
9.
CapronA.M., “Is Consent Always Necessary in Social Science Research?” In: Beauchamp, Eds. Ethical Issues in Social Science Research.Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press; 1982: Pp. 215, 220–229.
10.
BerlinI., Two Concepts of Liberty.Oxford: Clarendon Press; 1958: p. 16.
11.
FadenR.R.BeauchampT.L., A History and Theory of Informed Consent.New York: Oxford University Press; 1986.
12.
KatzJ., The Silent World of Doctor and Patient.New Haven: Yale University Press; 1983; President's Commission for the Study of Ethical Problems in Medicine and Biomedical and Behavioral Research. Making Health Care Decisions.Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office; 1982.
13.
FreundP., “Legal Frameworks for Human Experimentation”. Daedalus1969; 98: 323.
14.
Capron, supra note 9.
15.
FriedC., “Privacy.”Yale L J1968; 77: 482.
16.
BaumrindD., “Nature and Definition of Informed Consent in Research Involving Deception.” In: National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. The Belmont Report: Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects of Research DHEW Publication no. (OS) 78–0014. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office; 1978: Appendix, vol. 2, pp. 23–42.
17.
I am indebted to WestKathleen M., MPH, for this point.
18.
Farnsworth v. Procter & Gamble, Co., 758 F.2d 1545 (11th Cir. 1985); CurranW.J., “Protecting Confidentiality in Epidemiologic Investigations by the Centers for Disease Control”. N Eng J Med1986; 314: 1027–28.
19.
HughesE.C., “Who Studies Whom? Human Organization1974; 33: 327–334 (threats inhere in studying people in institutions); GellerJ.L.LidzC.W., “When the Subjects are Hospital Staff, Is It Ethical (or Possible) to Get Informed Consent?”: IRB: A Journal of Human Subjects Research1987; 9(5): 4–5 (problems with obtaining informed consent from employees); PattulloE.L., “Exemption from Review, Not Informed Consent”. IRB: A Journal of Human Subjects Research1987; 9(5) 6–8 (consent to observe employees' work can be given by employer).
20.
CapronA.M., “The Law of Genetic Therapy”. In: HamiltonM., Ed. The New Genetics and the Future of Man.Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishing Co.; 1972: Pp. 133, 150–152.
21.
TancrediL., “The New Technology of Psychiatry: Ethics, Epidemiology, and Technology Assessment”. In TancrediL., Ed. Ethical Issues in Epidemiologic Research.New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press; 1986: Pp. 1, 16.