biomedical ethics journal

this is professor feedback from last week journal's that your wrote.

" journal is good and discussed. Great Biblical integration and but I would like to see more use of textbook references. Good discussion into the topics."

Tracy Barnet
Bavya Dasini
Yusur Mansoor
Nicolas McLaughlin
Morgan Powe
Group Summary Week 4-Pain
This week our group aimed to define pain. We evaluated our definition of pain against scenarios that
compromised the ethical standards that protect the welfare of laboratory animals used for research purposes. Lastly,
we discussed our thoughts on various categories of drugs & their effects in relation to pain.
In the process, we also discussed the following topics:
 How do we care for God’s other creations?
 Is it ever appropriate to euthanize an animal?
 What are the limitations of the IACUC?
 What does God say about pain?
 What drugs are socially acceptable, if any?
The IACUC & Animal Welfare- Case Studies 6.1 & 6.2
Group thoughts
All members agree that animal welfare should take precedence in scientific research. Also, we agree that
although God created humans with His likeness, God created all living creatures & cares for them also (Psalm
50:10, ESV).
Individual thoughts
Case Study 6.1
Bavya, Tracy & Morgan agree that in both case studies the IACUC should be contacted. Nick and Yusur do not
think it is a necessity but states that a proposal to the IACUC is a good idea.
Support for Case Study 6.1
 Tracy states the IACUC is responsible for overseeing the how animals are cared for and the procedures
used at each facility according to PHS and AWA.
 Bavya states that experiments & procedures change therefore a proposal should be submitted to the IACUC
 “Students would be well advised to look at the protocols under which they are conducting their research.
laboratory techniques often drift over time as personnel and experience change” (Macrina, pg.185).
 "The IACUC also evaluates and makes recommendations regarding all aspects of an institution's animal
program" (Macrina 185).
Case Study 6.2
The group agrees that Dr. Spiegel should address the complaints towards the care of the animals. Everyone
in the group also agreed that Janie’s actions need to be addressed. However, the group was undecided about which
was more important: investigating Janie or to contact the IACUC about the animals.
Support for Case Study 6.2
 Tracy & Bavya agree that Dr. Spiegel should address the complaints about the animals first.
 Tracy states that the facility could be shut down if Dr. Spiegel is not following the ethical standards of
animal treatment.
 Bavya & Yusur state that if Dr. Spiegel cares about the integrity of his research or the animals, then he will
contact the IACUC.
 Nick and Tracy agree that an investigation on Janie should be done to determine if she is indeed a spy
 "For nothing is hidden that will not be made manifest, nor is anything secret that will not be known and
come to light" (Luke 8:17, ESV).
Tracy Barnet
Bavya Dasini
Yusur Mansoor
Nicolas McLaughlin
Morgan Powe
Group Summary Week 4-Pain
Conclusion
The fact that the postdoctoral student is developing procedures for the welfare of the animals that also
involve the use of euthanasia, a proposal should be submitted to the IACUC. Lastly, we agreed that animals do feel
pain & endure suffering. If scientists care about the animals, they should do right by the animals. We advise
researchers in both case studies to involve the IACUC for guidance.
Case studies 6.4 & 6.7- Animals & Pain
Group thoughts
All members agree that the welfare of the animals is the most important. Also, we agree that denying
treatment to animals in pain or prolonging the suffering of animals is a violation of animal ethics and a sin. Just as
God shows mercy towards us, we should also show mercy towards these animals.
Individual thoughts
Bavya, Tracy & Nick agree that Jiao should administer an analgesic to the rats if she believes they are in pain.
Morgan and Yusur also agree, but state that she should get conformation from a veterinarian before doing so
Support for Case Study 6.4
 Tracy, Nick, & Bavya agree that Jiao has a moral duty ordained by God to administer an analgesic to the
rats
 Nick further states that if the rats are in "'momentary or slight pain or distress'" (Macrina 187), then she has
an ethical duty to report the mistreatment
 "And you shall do what is right and good in the sight of the Lord" (Deut 6:18).
 Yusur & Morgan think that Jiao should contact the IACUC and the staff veterinarian to make sure the rats
are in pain
Individual thoughts
Bavya, Nick, Tracy & Morgan agree that Dr. Schwartz should contact Dr. Tanaka about the situation and get his
advice before doing anything. Yusur thinks that Dr. Schwartz should not get involved.
Support for Case Study 6.7
 Tracy & Bavya agree that Dr. Schwartz should contact first
 Nick and Morgan think that Dr. Schwartz should contact the veterinarian because the animals are suffering
 Nick states that Dr. Tanaka could contact the IUCAC and get permission for Dr. Schwartz to obtain the
necessary samples
 Bavya adds that the veterinarian could possibly save the rats or come up with a better way to save the rats
or get the samples.
 “Veterinarians and animal care professionals employed by this department serve as a powerful resource to
scientists. Using their knowledge can lead to both better animal care and better science” (Macrina, pg. 186).
 Yusur thinks that Dr. Schwartz should not get involved because she could face penalties with the IACUC
Conclusion
We think that if the animals are determined to be in pain, suffering, or close to death, then they should be
evaluated by a veterinarian and euthanized if that is the best outcome.
Case studies 6.9 & 6.10- Limitations of IACUC & Integrity of Research
Tracy Barnet
Bavya Dasini
Yusur Mansoor
Nicolas McLaughlin
Morgan Powe
Group Summary Week 4-Pain
Group thoughts
We agree that Dr. Featherstone has found a “loophole” which has allowed her to conduct her research using
antibodies from mouse ascites. We are divided as to whether her solution was ethical or not. We agree that the
welfare of the animals is more important than Tom’s dissertation. As students we empathize with his situation.
Individual thoughts
Tracy, Morgan, & Yusur think Dr. Featherstone’s methods are unethical. Nick & Bavya do not think it was
unethical & are unsure if she will face repercussions with the IACUC.
Support for Case Study 6.9
 Tracy, Morgan, Bavya &Yusur state that Dr. Featherstone acted unethically because she acted against the
IACUC.
 Tracy sates that Dr. Featherstone cannot repackage the same product and call it something else
 Nick & Bavya state that they could not find support in the Macrina text that specifically addresses the
commercial use of laboratory materials
Tracy, Bavya, Morgan & Nick agree that they would not continue with the procedure on the rats & call the staff
veterinarian. Nick & Yusur state that they would first consider if they are doing the procedure incorrectly & they
would contact the principal scientist.
Support for Case Study 6.10
 Tracy, Bavya, Morgan & Nick agree that they would use their own judgement & stop the procedure
 The IACUC states that “animals that would suffer severe or chronic pain and distress that cannot be
relieved must be euthanized” (Macrina, pg. 189).
 Yusur heeds Tom’s words that it could be possible that he is incorrectly performing the procedure
 Nick further states that Tom needs to have patience and do right by God
 "But let patience have its perfect work, that you may be perfect and complete, lacking nothing" (James 1:4).
Conclusion
We agree there are limitations of the IACUC. Dr. Louis should complain to the IACUC, but we do not
think that Dr. Featherstone will face any penalties. As for case study 6.10, Tom’s suffering is not comparable to the
physical pain these rats are enduring. We advise Tom to consider the needs of the animals over his own.
Substances, Uses, & Effects
Group thoughts
Most of the group agrees that that social drinking (alcohol) is different than drinking coffee. Each drug has
different uses & can be designated for certain purposes. The ethics of these drugs depends on the reason that they are
consumed.
Social Drinking & Coffee
Individual Thoughts
 Nick & Morgan do not agree with Geisler's prohibition of alcohol
 “But the Bible condemns the use of intoxicating beverages” (Geisler, N.L., 2010).
Tracy Barnet
Bavya Dasini
Yusur Mansoor
Nicolas McLaughlin
Morgan Powe
Group Summary Week 4-Pain
 He further argues that alcohol may be consumed by a Christian so long as it is within moderation and in
accordance with all governmental laws and statutes.
 Morgan concludes coffee & social drinking are different based of physiological effects that are independent
of the Bible
 Bavya, Tracy, Morgan & Yusur state that social drinking leads to alcohol abuse/addiction which is more
dangerous than coffee addiction
Valium v. Tobacco v. Marijuana
Individual Thoughts
 Bavya, Morgan, & Tracy agree that there are medical uses for valium & marijuana but not tobacco
 Nick states that the use of these drugs within the legal context is ethical & should be allowed
 "Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except God and the
authorities that exist are appointed by God" (Rom 13:1-2).
 Yusur discusses the controversy surrounding marijuana, but for epileptic individuals the use of this drug
has helped improve their quality of life significantly.
Conclusion
The ethical use of these drugs depends on the reason for which they are being used. We believe that certain
drugs can be used for medicinal purposes which would be allowed by God.
Summary of Group Contributions
Each person in the group contributed equally by actively discussing each case study & question,
formulating counter arguments, and providing textbook & Biblical sources to support their thoughts.
Tracy initiated the discussion & provided Biblical support for case studies 6.1 & 6.2. Nick provided
Biblical support for case study 6.10. He also added sources from the Geisler text for the question about social
drinking & coffee. Morgan provided additional Biblical support for case study 6.4 & contributed the most to the
group thoughts on the additional questions about drug use. Yusur added Biblical sources & counterarguments for
case studies 6.9 & 6.10. Bavya provided sources from the Macrina text for case studies 6.1,6.2, &6.7 & she
organized our collective thoughts into a written summary.

Journal Entries Instructions

You will be required to write a Journal Entry about each module/week’s discussion. The Journal Entry will be kept completely private and confidential between you and your instructor. In each entry, you will summarize what was discussed in your own words, talk about the module/week’s topics, and provide novel insight gained from the discussion. You must provide at least 1 citation from the assigned Reading & Study material and at least 1 citation from the Bible. Each entry must be 2,000–3,000 words.

Although you will be writing in a “journal,” do not simply state what you think. The goal of the journal is for you to think about what others have said and how that fits with your understanding of the topics. While you must demonstrate a biblical understanding of each topic, the goal is for you to provide sound arguments for how to address each question and/or case study.

Since this journal is a private setting, you may write your entries in the first person, within reason. The goal is to be pithy and thoughtful. Being concise with your words while addressing each topic will be challenging, so give yourself plenty of time to formulate ideas and possible rough drafts. Since your instructor will be the only person who will see your journal, you may talk about what your classmates said in the discussion, as long as you do not attack them personally. Remember: the most important rule throughout this entire course is no personal attacks.

Each Journal Entry will be submitted in Blackboard in the space provided, not as a separate Word document. Your instructor will not open any Journal Entries submitted as Word documents. It is recommended that you craft your journal in Word but then copy and paste it into Blackboard.

Each Journal Entry is due by 11:59 p.m. (ET) on Sunday of the assigned module/week, except Journal Entry 8. Journal Entry 8 is due by 11:59 p.m. (ET) on Friday of Module/Week 8.