If healthy people are intentionally infected with COVID-19 for science, they should be paid

An interdisciplinary team of international experts suggests that participants should receive a “significant” amount and be ethically paid.

Healthy people volunteering to get SARS-CoV-2 should receive it to help scientists better understand how to tackle the virus. payment— When it is determined that it is ethical to proceed with these studies.

These are the results of a new peer-reviewed study published in. American Journal of BioethicsWe evaluated the ethics of paying participants to participate in the so-called “Human Infection Challenge Study” (HICS).

Over the past few months, there has been extensive media coverage and debate about the world’s first COVID-19 HICS, which will begin later this year in the UK. This type of research is of particular value in vaccine testing and can speed up the development of new vaccines.

The use of HICS for diseases that are fatal and for which there is currently no cure is ethically controversial. Part of that controversy has to do with whether participants should be paid for such dangerous efforts and how payment affects their consent.

Among the supporters of pursuing the COVID-19 Challenge Trial is the organization, 1Day Sooner.

1Day Sooner sponsored the report underlying the new study and sought an independent assessment of whether and how much people should be paid to participate in the Challenge Trial.

International research teams in the United Kingdom, United States, and Canada do not necessarily approve the use of HICS in COVID-19. However, as HICS progresses, their findings reflect that not only do they pay participants, but their payments must be “substantial.”

A research team that includes bioethics, economics, science, medicine, legal experts, and two individuals who are interested in participating in SARS-CoV-2 HICS is a research team where scientists pay people ethically. I am participating in HICS, which has created a framework to follow in order to evaluate. They also considered paying in a similar study, but pointed out the difficulty of finding this information.

“Our work was stimulated by concerns that a novel might be needed to pay for SARS-CoV-2HICS. Ethical frameworkJohn Russell Dixon, Presidential Associate Professor of Medical Ethics at the University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, states lead author Holly Fernandez Lynch.

“Payments for HICS participation should be treated like any other payment. Clinical trial Involve healthy participants, “she says.

“Offering high payments can face scrutiny and concerns, but offering large payments for research participation can be ethically appropriate, and low payments are also critical ethics. You need to consider raising ethical concerns. “

Professor Fernandez Lynch, a lawyer and bioethics expert, adds: “SARS-CoV-2 HICS cannot continue without sufficient preparation to compensate for research-related and other harm. Efforts to minimize risk and promote social value. ..

“Our hopes for the future are to ease payment concerns as these studies progress and to pursue a broader project of ensuring ethical payments for all clinical study participants. Analysis is useful. “

The framework developed by the team is divided into two parts. The first focuses on three main motives for payment. “Reimbursement” (own expense), “compensation” (including payment of time, burden, inconvenience of isolation, etc.), “incentive” (expand). Scope of individuals who are willing to consider participating). Part 2 discusses appropriate compensation in the event of harm, from injury to death.

In developing the framework, the team paid special attention to public trust and acknowledged that “research funding can have an impact.” Public trust Ultimately, they said, “The best way to promote trust in HICS is to help the public understand why this design is scientifically important and ethically acceptable.” I conclude.

“HICS can only proceed if rigorous research and ethical standards are met,” said Thomas Darton, co-author of the University of Sheffield’s School of Infectious, Immunological and Cardiovascular Diseases.

Dr. Darton is a HICS researcher, but he is not working on the SARS-CoV-2 virus.

He states: “If the risks associated with these studies are unreasonable in terms of potential interests, then payments for participation do not help achieve ethical acceptance, but if the studies are ethical, the payments are. You can’t be unethical just because it’s offered. “

Another factor the team considered was whether COVID-19 HICS was “extremely dangerous” and how it affected payment levels. Ultimately, they concluded that “ethical concerns about payments for these studies are the same as payment concerns in all clinical studies.”

“Although it is certainly relevant to HICS ethical acceptability considerations, including the importance of research-related harm planning, the increased risk of HICS payments compared to other types of research. We do not support the adoption of new frameworks, “adds co-author Emily. Associate Professor of Medical Ethics at Emmanuel and Robert Hart, School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania.

Project restrictions include that the team’s perspective is “restricted to Global North.” Therefore, they state that additional considerations may be relevant if the study is conducted elsewhere. The team also refused to identify the appropriate payment amount or range for HICS or SARS-CoV-2HICS. “Stakeholders must take the final step between conceptual guidance and the actual payment proposal,” the treatise concludes. “This means that there may be several different payment offers that can be justified, but the framework helps determine which offers are ethically appropriate,” says Professor Fernandez Lynch. Says.

---

---