"The study was meant to discover how syphilis affected blacks as opposed to whites—the theory being that whites experienced more neurological complications from syphilis, whereas blacks were more susceptible to cardiovascular damage."
If this is the true experiment, it seems that there would have to be black AND white men tested. So why would the media not promote the white men being tested as well? Is it because they are not poor and undereducated like the black men were? And if so, does this make it more or less ethical?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
first of all, during that time america was racist, and what the media aims on is attention and making a fuss about things, so they may have not promoted it and rather used the black men's side of the experiment to obtain more attention to say that the black men were being cheated on, which was true: "
ReplyDelete“used human beings as laboratory animals in a long and inefficient study of how long it takes syphilis to kill someone.”
and
one of the doctors involved explained, “we have no further interest in these patients until they die.”
this could also been taken in a way such that it shows that these people were immoral, along with this, racism was a big issue in america during that time. When the media got all of this together, ofcourse they are going to stick to speaking the truth in a way that catches the attention of ..in this case, the world.
it would be lees ethical and it would also not follow a true patter of any method to study because a scientist would want to have many variables eliminated and if this is for observation you would want more than one monkey to observe
ReplyDeleteI agree with angel8a, this study is like a simple math problem; you can not solve an equation with more than one variable. The scientists had to try to keep as many variables constant as they could.
ReplyDeleteAlso, the article stated that "The intent of the study was to record the natural history of syphilis in Blacks." Because the point of the study is to see the reaction in African Americans, it is not whether the study is more or less ethical simply because the experiment was for African Americans in the first place. Although this is a time of racial discrimination, the article compares the affects of syphilis between whites and African Americans just to state that they react differently; not to favor one over the other.
Agreeing, we have to remember that these experiments were conducted by scientists. Meaning, they had to use the scientific method which also means they must have a constant. Yes, we also have to remember that the intent was to study syphilis in Blacks. In my opinion why they didn't show media coverage of the white men was because perhaps they didn't want to show that white males could contract this disease, just the same as black males. It all comes down to the common denominator of racism.
ReplyDeleteIf the study was truly for race discrimination then they would have tested whites as well. The results of this test could prove the theory that the blacks of that time were a different species altogether. If the whites had a different result of the disease than blacks this could have been the point of evidence that prolonged the racism in America. If these men were truly racist they would have gone about things in a very different way. In fact I believe that these men are in fact depraved and fascinated with death and simply did not want to be outcasts as a result of their depraved fascinations. To kill a black man was far more accepted. Another possible reason is that if they were to have whites dying in their study they would immediately be shut down by society. There was a far greater disapproval of the killing of whites. Either way the scientists did not want to be attacked for the outcome of their experiments...or fascinations.
ReplyDelete