Medical research is subject to ethical standards that promote respect for all human beings and protect their health and your rights. Some research populations are at risk and in need of special protection. The specific economic and medical needs of people must be recognized. Particular attention is also needed for those who cannot give or refuse their own consent, those who may be subject to coerced consent, those who will not personally benefit from the research and those for whom research is carefully combined. One possible answer is that it derives its authority from a WMA statement. It is the largest group of physicians in the world and, as such, the assertion that it is an important body for statements on the collective opinions of the medical profession could be legitimized. Only time will tell what the right answer is for the future of the DoH. However, it is worth considering the following: when controversies arise, such as the Indians over paragraphs 29 and 30, there are really only three general reasons that can highlight such controversies. The Medical Research Council (MRC) UK conducted a study in 1943-4 to study treatment with patulin (an extract of penicillium patulinum) in colds6. 6 This was one of the last studies on non-randomized or quasi-randomized assignment of subjects.6 The MRC Patulin Clinical Trials Committee (1943) was led by Sir Harold Himsworth. and his statisticians were M Greenwood and W J Martin. In this national study, more than a thousand British office workers and factories were denmigists suffering from colds.
It was a rather moving task in times of war, but with regard to the Nuremberg Code, the 1964 DoH represented a subtle shift in the balance between the responsibility of the researcher and individual researchers and “promoting scientific knowledge and aiding suffering humanity”, i.e. public health. This postponement is most clearly manifested in the requirement to obtain informed agreement from the participants. This requirement was absolute in the Nuremberg Code, but it was weakened in the DoH to allow research on children, especially vaccines, and on incompetent or “captive” population groups, such as prisoners and the military. For a research subject who is not legally incompetent, physically or mentally incapable of giving consent or who is a legally incompetent minor, the examiner must obtain the informed consent of the statutory authorized representative in accordance with applicable legislation.