Science, Ethics and Censorship

Philosophy Talk hosts Ken Taylor and John Perry of Stanford University examine the potential use and abuse of science and whether or not we should limit it. Should scientists adopt the medical ethic "first do no harm" in their pursuit of an objective search for truth? One of the most talked about examples today of whether the government should or shouldn't restrict scientific inquiry has to do with stem cell research. Arnold Kriegstein, MD, PhD, director of the UCSF Institute for Regeneration Medicine, says the research has tremendous potential for curing disease and therefore should go forward as quickly as possible, while, at the same time, meeting careful ethical guidelines. "It's important that studies that involve human embryonic stem cells need to be scrutinized, not just from the potential of whether it's technically feasible but whether it's ethically something that we should be engaged in or not," urges Kriegstein, explaining that the UCSF Ethics Committee examines these issues and theoretical considerations in embryonic stem cell research, such as the potential for combining human and animal organs. But this concern, says Kriegstein, "shouldn't prevent us from moving forward in this field." Related Links: Science, Ethics and Censorship Philosophy Talk, KALW-FM, May 13, 2007