The Analysis Of The Excerpt From The Aaron Ridley’s Book “Ill-gotten Gains: On The Use Of Results From Unethical Experiments In Medicine,”

Aaron Ridley’s book “Ill-Gotten Benefits: On Use of Results from Unethical Experimentalments in Medicine” provides a short summary that explains why unethical data use is acceptable, even if it condones researcher’s moral actions. Ridley asserts that the acceptance of unethical behavior is more than just benefiting from it (Ridley).

Ridley supports his claim by showing a hypothetical situation in which a murderer drains victim’s blood into an empty bucket. A secondary person, who knows the contents of the bucket and how it got there, finds the bucket. This secondary person suddenly becomes surrounded by flames. He then pours the bucket full of blood onto the flames to stop himself burning. Ridley says that it would be incorrect to claim that the secondary person accepts how this blood was made. He used it to his advantage in order to save himself. Ridley states that nothing in the secondary person’s behavior suggests that he accepts the murderer’s actions (Ridley).

It is absurd to assume that engaging in unethical behavior implies your agreement with its methods. Another way to show such a claim is by replicating the unethical research methods. You could use the information you find to support your own work by using it only. But, it would seem acceptable to copy the way you obtained the results instead of applying them.

Applying this principle to Vipeholm cases will show that the condition is not only valid but also clear. The Vipeholm study was performed in Sweden between 1945-54. Subjects were given excessive sugar to determine if there was a correlation between sugar intake, dental caries formation (Krasse 1785). The scientific perspective of the study proved that sugar can cause tooth decay. It was widely reported and used by the public (Krasse 1787). It is unprofessional to force subjects to eat foods in order to cause dental caries.

We can now put into practice the findings of this study. Sugar can cause tooth decay and cavities. This statement does not condone the behavior of Vipeholm researchers. We are just using the valuable information to use elsewhere in medicine. However, if the study were conducted in the same way, with subjects being forced to inhale harmful substances to trigger disease, we would be condoning unethical research.

We would condone the unprofessional methods used to obtain it by replicating them. There are no moral issues in using unethical data. The question is more about how the data was obtained. If we copy the procedure, we are not morally wrong. The issue is how the data came to be.