Mathematics
Discussion Board Question Number 2
A fundamental ethical problem in
statistics arises in experimentation (i.e., in the context of studies of
experimental drugs for treating AIDS). On one side, organizations such
as the National Institute of Health insist on randomly assigning
treatments such as flipping a coin for each patient to decide which
treatment to assign.
The advantage of randomized experiments is
that they allow reliable conclusions without the need to worry about
lurking variables. However, some groups of AIDS patients have opposed
randomization, instead making the argument that each patient should be
assigned the best available treatment (or to be more precise, whatever
treatment is currently believed to be the best). The ethical dilemma is
to balance the benefits to the patients in the study (who would like the
opportunity to choose among available treatments) with future patients
(who would be served by learning as soon as possible about the
effectiveness of the competing treatments).
The issue is
complicated. On one hand, the randomized study is most trustworthy if
all the patients in the study participate. If they are not treated
respectfully, the patients might go outside the study and try other
drugs, which could bias the estimates of treatment effects. On the other
hand, the patients might benefit from being in an experimental study.
Even if the treatment is randomized, the patients are getting close
medical attention from the researchers. Current best practice is to
design studies so that all subjects will be expected to benefit in some
way, but still keeping the randomized element. For example, a study can
compare two potentially beneficial experimental treatments, rather than
comparing a treatment to an inert “control.” However, there will always
be conflicts of interest between the patients in the study, the
scientists conducting it, and the public at large.
In your
original post, compare and contrast at least two research designs that
might be used to research life threatening diseases/disorders. At least
one design should present ethical issues and at least one design should
minimize potential ethical issues. Provide at least one Scripture
passage that supports your ethical perspectives on medical/public health
research.
Your thread is due by 11:59 p.m. (ET) on Thursday and your two replies are due by 11:59 p.m. (ET) on Sunday.
Discussion Question Number 3
Consider the following three scenarios:
1. Suppose you work for an organization that runs tests for life-threatening diseases and then discusses the results with their patients. You have just tested a 45 year old male patient, father of six, and according to the test he is terminally ill. Statistics shows that the man has seven months to live.
2. Your 31 year old daughter, who for five years has been underemployed and unemployed, announces she has secured a stable and high paying job as Director of Operations for a Colorado Marijuana facility.
3. You are working for a foreign government that has had a disease epidemic in a certain region of their country which has led to the deaths of three million children. The disease is spread by mosquitos, and the only quick and sure way to stop the epidemic is to spray Chemical H on the jungle environments where the mosquitos live. Spraying the chemical will lead to environmental issues for 20 years.
Pick one of the above scenarios and in that context, explain how your knowledge of biostatistics might inform how you address the situation and how you might advance a Biblical worldview. Fell free to add details or assumptions left ambiguous in the prompt.
Your thread is due by 11:59 p.m. (ET) on Thursday and your two replies are due by 11:59 p.m. (ET) on Sunday.
