These three articles tell how experiments with people’s lives was done with

Table of Contents

These three articles tell how experiments with people’s lives was done with no thoughts or care on the outcome when it was over. In these studies, the researchers violated the trust of people by using their authority and power. Many lives were ruined because of these studies both were kept secret. Laud Humphreys did not infect anyone with a deadly disease, but he broke trust of people’s private lives by invading their personal space. The Guatemala and Tuskegee experiment both dealt with people either being infected with syphilis or having syphilis but not getting cured. The difference between the 2 studies was that the Guatemalan’s were infected purposely. The age, mental health, or sex did not matter they just wanted to study the disease. There were children as young as the age of one who was involved. Even if a child or psychiatric patient was asked to give consent how could that be approved. The people Guatemalan’s did not have a say on if they wanted to be involved in studies that could end in death. The researchers already knew what the disease would do to people in the end from previous experiments. There was no need to harm others if there were already people who agreed to be in these experiments. This experiment was not just unethical it was morally wrong. They took advantage of these people because of who they were. The patients were never cured which means they risked spreading this disease to people who were not even there. They not only infected these people with syphilis, they also infected them with different STD’s for further studies. What is hard to understand is why none of the people involved had any legal charges brought against them. The Tuskegee experiment used men who were already infected with the disease. These men were told they would receive medical for free if they participated in the study. The researchers even went as far as to hire a black nurse to help deceive these men into thinking they were going to get help. These men considered her a friend when she also helped the experiment. She did try to fix things in the end, but it was too little too late. Her knowing as much as she did and not telling them the truth also played a role in the trust issues. Back in that era minorities stuck together, and she broke the code. When they did find out the truth about the study, they could not go anywhere else to get the medicine they needed, because they were placed on a black list. An article from Tuskegee University states that, on July 25, 1972 Jean Heller broke the story and said that there had been a 40-year nontherapeutic experiment called a “study” on the effects of untreated syphilis on black men in the rural south. (, 2019). This could also be considered murder and or attempted murder if one had social mores. In both these cases there was no consent for the infecting people or people not being cured. Even if the doctors would have written out a consent for the patients to sign, most patients would not have been able to read the documents. They took advantage of them without a care for what would happen, and the fact that they were minorities played a huge role in the decisions made. The doctors involved in this study did not give any regards to the Hippocratic oath that they took after graduating. In a section of the modern version of the Hippocratic oath it states that “I will prevent disease whenever I can, for prevention is preferable to cure. (, 2019). Over the years the versions of it has changed but they all still mean the same. Things have changed and this is not allowed now, but it still happens just in different forms. In discussion about these studies birth control was talked about. The doctors do not inform patients of the side effects from getting the birth control shot. The Tearoom trade was nothing like the syphilis studies. He basically wanted to see the social behavior of men who were living double lives. Naturalism is how he was able to get inside of the world of the gay men. Yes, lying to get their addresses from the police to watch them in their homes morally wrong, but their poor judgement of character allowed that to happen. Ethically that is all he had done wrong. No one died in this study, the only thing really harmed was ego’s, pride, and trust. Even though times were different and being gay was not socially acceptable, having sex in public places with someone of the opposite sex was also a taboo. His research just proved another reason why trust of people in general is gone. No names were mentioned in his study, but most likely there was some housewives who came across that study and wondered if their husband was one of the men. The study did not prove anything and unfortunately there are still grown men who are living double lives these days. Over the years research experiments like the Guatemala and Tuskegee experiment illegal. The social evolution has made being gay acceptable and humans are no longer used in experiments like the Guatemala and Tuskegee. That’s not saying things like this will not happen again. History does repeat its self because no one seems to learn from prior mistakes. The use of vaccinations for children is a social norm followed by mostly everyone. Understanding why some people do not agree with getting them is also agreeable. Since the United States government failed to protect innocent lives then, people should be a little weary about them now. Yes, in both cases survivors were giving restitution, but money cannot buy back a life or make it better. Laud Humphreys wanted to find out more about homosexuals because it was not accepted in his era. The only unethical thing he did in the process was violating the personal lives of the men he studied and their families.