Using information gained for unethical experiments.

Hey, so I've been wondering about the idea of using unethical experimentation's results. Such experiments as conducted by the Nazis during WWII as well as the Japanese. Test to see the affects of certain chemical weapons on humans, how the human body reacts to certain extreme temperatures, ect. Now, most people would frown on these experiments, and I'm not really looking into talking about the ethics of these experiments, just about everyone will agree that they are unethical. Instead I want to discuss what is done with this knowledge once it is obtained. The events of the past cannot be changed, but we do with the information could mean life and death.

Do we scrap the information that cost innocent lives, even if it could save someone else life?

Do we use the information, or will that only endorse such practices in the future?


While I'm mostly focused on physical experiments I also know there are some phycological experiments that have also been dubbed unethical. Feel free to discuss the use of data from these experiments as well.

Yeah, this is a hard question. We can say the damage is done and go forward, but that's sort of giving the criminals a pass of sorts. It's unfortunate, but the further back in the past you go the less one's crimes matter and more likely people are to turn a blind eye.

Like the case of Henrietta Lacks, who had cancer cells from a tumor taken from her without her knowledge. Those cells are called "immortal" and have been used in labs across the world for decades to conduct experiments that have probably affected all of us in some way or another. I'm reading just now that the genome of the cells were sequenced, without Lack's family's permission.

I think the ethical thing is not to use research that's been 'tainted'. It wouldn't be an easy thing to do in some cases since the knowledge might be really useful, but we have to have standards.

This might sound cruel, but my thoughts are this.

Although the perpetrators should not get off scott free, if the information provides useful insight into questions unanswered, we should use it. It may be blood research, but if we trash it, my thoughts are that then the victims will have suffered for nothing. That, to me, seems like a waste.

It's like what Scarf said.

I'll use Eugenics as an example. Eugenics was originally a study of the various races of humanity in respect to each other, as well as other focus points, in a manner that would determine how we could get the future generations to be healthier, smarter, etc.

The study of race, in concerns to biology, majorly helped the field of biology. It raised social questions which helped social studies and related fields. It made people focus more on their health - which is better for you and which isn't? It made people want to get smarter so that, ideally, their children would be.

Eugenics evolved into a movement that caused discord throughout the world; however, many findings made during that time, the ones that weren't biased or opinionated, helped the majority of the fields today in various ways - even psychology, which is currently very popular.

Since ethics evolve, and we decide what is ethical as a species, meh. Use what we know when we need it, regardless of how it was obtained, that knowledge could save lives. If we decided to avoid all information we learn by events and activities that we now consider unethical now, we'd have to ignore everything about the Nazi driven Holocaust, that includes why it is now considered wrong, meaning we'd learn nothing from such mistakes. Salem Witch Trials would be a forgotten story, increasing the likelihood of it being repeated. As a species, we learn more from our mistakes than what we do correctly, because there are millions of more ways to do something right than wrong.

Did you know a lot of people died horrible deaths to develop vaccines? The general method of creating and using vaccines, I mean. Also for anesthesia, lots of horrible deaths for those, many of which were volunteers actually. Look into the first vaccination experiment, scary, a child dies because of it, but was it worth it, ultimately yes. Now we have better methods for developing such things, much more humane as well, but should we forget about all medicine just because of the dark days before modern science was developed?

Yep. If we can use it, we use it. All of science is built on someone else's work, so it's really strange to hear someone say no, we can't use somebody else's work. And like KittenKoder says, it does save lives. Nazi experimentation taught us a lot about how humans react to adverse conditions as well as the effects of various drugs. Apparently, almost all of what we know about how humans react to freezing is based on Nazi science. I think what is done is done and we should use it to the best of our ability.

You're missing the dynamic of, if we don't use the information, those who died to give it to us have literally only been slaughtered for the fun of it.
I'm not justifying their actions because science! i'm saying if I were to die not on my own accord I want to die for a reason.

War has only two positive outcomes; bringing humanity closer as a whole after the conflict is settled, and the immense scientific and technological advances it brings.
Seriously, people are bound to disagree. When entire countries disagree they have thousands if not millions of people all working together for a common 'selfless' goal, so what if that goal is to obliterate an entire country doing the same thing as you. And if the war ends in a peace treaty that's the best possible outcome.

I say bring on WWIII so we can have time travel already.

If you have it, use it. There's no need to have had participants suffer in vain.

It's important to realize that the experiments conducted by various institutions is beyond insane. At the same time, we have to realize that certain results are more useful than others. For instance, a Nazi experiment was conducted involving putting up a mother and her child to an electric chair, and giving a button to the mother that would stop the flow of electricity from her child and bring it to her. The experiment was conducted to test a mother's love for her child. Hideous, right? Another Nazi experiment was conducted to see at what temperature living human skin would catch fire without spark.

These two experiments are beyond any normal person's sense of logic, and no one today would dare to conduct anything as crazy as these. However, there is a peculiar difference between the results of the two experiments: the first experiment's results are absolutely useless and would be plain wrong to keep on record. However, the second experiment's results would be useful for, say, helping reduce the likelihood of chemical burns, among other things - these results are valuable, although obtained unethically.

Seems like an easy question to me. What's done is done. It's not a matter of encouraging anything. If people can benefit, if it can save or better lives, it's unethical not to use it. We weren't the ones who did these unethical things, quite the opposite: we're adamantly opposed to them. I fail to see how anyone could possibly argue that people should die so we don't use information that we obtained through completely ethical means.

Man of you aren't going to like what I have to say, but I am for doing unethical experiments. Don't get me wrong. I believe that every human life is precious. If a person is on death row however, we should be able to experiment on them.Or if a person volunteers. As bad as they may be, from certain unethical experiments we have learned quite a lot. For example, in WWII Nazi Scientist Josef Mengele held experiments with Siamese twins. From these experiments we learned how humans would react if they were siamese, which was fatal. We've also learned much from disease through the Nazis and through the settlers when they first arrived to America with the Indians. We don't need to repeat these experiments, but we should not scrap them. Many of these experiments have advanced the way for technology. Doctors used to do lobotomies in the 50's and 60's which was highly unethical. Today, this illegal practice has helped neuroscientists learn more about the brain in their research. I full heartedly believe that we should use what we know for legal practices in the future.

One thing that I would really like scientists to test is the development of human growth through the pituitary gland. We should test how the amount of HGH a person has in different forms of their life helps them with growth. There is still much that we don't know much about in this field.

Idk I may just be too pro-science in some cases. :/