"Does Hitler have a right to privacy?" and other big questions in research ethics.

Comments

• CaptainBasculin@lemmy.bascul.in ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  The DNA would probably fall in public domain before any significant research could be done with it.

  source

  • Jessvj93@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Maybe this is the way, we looked at ancient human DNA, maybe there should be a public domain aspect to it. Sequence today, study after XX years.

    source
• ICCrawler@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Ethically, it may be questionable, personally, IDGAF.

  source
• _Nico198X_@europe.pub ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Oh suuure…!

  source
• thegr8goldfish@startrek.website ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  This article make a big stink about how mentioning that he had genes that showed “very high” scores for a predisposition to autism, schizophrenia and bipolar disorder and how we shouldn’t mention that because it might make people with these disorders feel more Hitlery. It also says he had similar genes for having a micropenis but doesn’t show the same concern for people with this affliction. Well, Lemmy, does this new information make you feel more Hitlery?

  source
• zxqwas@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  What is the scientific value of it and why can’t those values be realised in a way that does not even raise ethical concerns?

  The best argument for it was that eventually someone would do it and they may just as well do it rigorously.

  source
• SculptusPoe@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  I think everybody’s DNA should be open source…

  source
• HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Just ask whoever saved his brain to ask permission

  source
• TacoButtPlug@sh.itjust.works ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  i see BBC is still at the “hard hitting” story telling 🙄

  source