Imagination
For a better society
I’ve been thinking alot about America as a grand experiment (as stated by the Founding Fathers) and the role of ethics within experimentation. Ethical considerations were rarely considered for research subjects during the Enlightenment era. Today, various fields have ethical review boards to address this question, because we humans need moral guidance. Humanity has not yet evolved to weigh emotion and logic perfectly. In 2025, many people use the literal words of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution to justify their entrenched beliefs. These textualists ignore the overall values and ideals that the founders tried to create. Our form of government was meant to shift and evolve as we shifted and evolved. Unfortunately, the Federal government has morphed from a weak, ineffective, poor coalition of individuals into a monster. The monster is never satisfied, always hungry for prey, and easily bribed. Some presidents believed they could tame the monster to bend the moral arc of the universe; others believed they could use the monster to achieve their own ends. They eventually learn; the monster only pretends to comply.
Polling, pollsters, and polls are not intrinsically bad, much like the common cold. As the cancer within our society continues to metastasize and weaken our systems, polls are like a secondary infection - usually no big deal, but in weakened bodies, deadly. A few days ago, I shared my opinions on pollsters with a friend. Many reputable agencies conduct ethical research and market polling, but they are outnumbered by bad actors like Rasmussen Reports and smaller firms. They aren’t telling people what to think, just asking questions - like young MAGA hat-wearing teenagers at a No Kings protest. Of course, Democratic Party candidates also engage in similar behavior by hiring firms that will repeatedly ask questions about Senator Markey’s age or the ethnicity of Kamala Harris. Here’s part of a poll I recently received:
Is this the worst thing happening right now? No, but whoever is paying for this poll is funding campaigns dividing us into smaller and smaller camps. I wish the system did not incentivize behaviors like this - I want to elect candidates who can imagine a brighter future. And when those candidates are elected, I want them to stay grounded in their community and stay true to themselves.
The system we currently have does not incentivize boldness, authenticity, or integrity. Can we conceive of governance that centers on our humanity, connection to the interdependent web of all existence, and responsible democratic values? We’ll never know if we don’t try. I believe we should try. Perhaps we can begin by examining the Guiding Principles for Ethical Research published by the National Institute of Health. These principles have evolved from the Nuremberg Code (1947), Belmont Report (1979), U.S. Common Rule (1991), Declaration of Helsinki (2000), Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences (rev. 2002), and decades of scholarship. What would our society look like if citizens had the same rights as participants?
Social and clinical value
Every research study is designed to answer a specific question. The answer should be important enough to justify asking people to accept some risk or inconvenience for others. In other words, answers to the research question should contribute to scientific understanding of health or improve our ways of preventing, treating, or caring for people with a given disease to justify exposing participants to the risk and burden of research.
Scientific validity
A study should be designed in a way that will get an understandable answer to the important research question. This includes considering whether the question asked is answerable, whether the research methods are valid and feasible, and whether the study is designed with accepted principles, clear methods, and reliable practices. Invalid research is unethical because it is a waste of resources and exposes people to risk for no purpose
Fair subject selection
The primary basis for recruiting participants should be the scientific goals of the study — not vulnerability, privilege, or other unrelated factors. Participants who accept the risks of research should be in a position to enjoy its benefits. Specific groups of participants (for example, women or children) should not be excluded from the research opportunities without a good scientific reason or a particular susceptibility to risk.
Favorable risk-benefit ratio
Uncertainty about the degree of risks and benefits associated with a clinical research study is inherent. Research risks may be trivial or serious, transient or long-term. Risks can be physical, psychological, economic, or social. Everything should be done to minimize the risks and inconvenience to research participants to maximize the potential benefits, and to determine that the potential benefits are proportionate to, or outweigh, the risks.
Independent review
To minimize potential conflicts of interest and make sure a study is ethically acceptable before it starts, an independent review panel should review the proposal and ask important questions, including: Are those conducting the trial sufficiently free of bias? Is the study doing all it can to protect research participants? Has the trial been ethically designed and is the risk–benefit ratio favorable? The panel also monitors a study while it is ongoing.
Informed consent
Potential participants should make their own decision about whether they want to participate or continue participating in research. This is done through a process of informed consent in which individuals (1) are accurately informed of the purpose, methods, risks, benefits, and alternatives to the research, (2) understand this information and how it relates to their own clinical situation or interests, and (3) make a voluntary decision about whether to participate.
Respect for potential and enrolled participants
Individuals should be treated with respect from the time they are approached for possible participation — even if they refuse enrollment in a study — throughout their participation and after their participation ends. This includes:
respecting their privacy and keeping their private information confidential
respecting their right to change their mind, to decide that the research does not match their interests, and to withdraw without a penalty
informing them of new information that might emerge in the course of research, which might change their assessment of the risks and benefits of participating
monitoring their welfare and, if they experience adverse reactions, unexpected effects, or changes in clinical status, ensuring appropriate treatment and, when necessary, removal from the study
informing them about what was learned from the research
Here’s a fun tidbit I found while doing research for this post. It’s from The Heritage Foundation in 2007. Ahhh, who knew I would be nostalgic for those years?
This quote equally depresses and delights me:
President Bush’s ambitious declaration of the advance of freedom and democracy to be his banner causes has run into a tempest of radical terrorist opposition in Iraq and elsewhere in the Middle East, calling into doubt a once promising Iraq policy. Ironically, those on the left who in the past declared themselves democracy’s champions have responded with cynicism to the goal of bringing freedom to oppressed nations. Advancing the American model of governance is regarded by some both here and in Europe as naive and imperialist. This is a sad state of affairs.
A Pew Research Center poll released [June 2007] on global views of America illustrates the problem. Public rejection of American democracy is prevalent in most countries. This may reflect opinions about the way in which the United States has implemented its pro-democracy agenda, and also about America’s democratic values themselves. In 43 of 47 countries surveyed, a majority say that the United States promotes democracy mostly where it serves its interests, rather than as a matter of principle. Even more unfortunately, this cynicism also includes 63 percent in the United States itself. Only 45 percent of Americans have faith in American leadership in the world.