Tweeting Science and Ethics
American Journal of Bioethics 10(5) May 2010: 30-31
Murdoch and Scott (2010) challenge us to think more deeply about the complex and challenging practical realities of stem cell tourism. The authors describe the strong consensus within the scientific and ethics communities against the sale of stem cell transplantations in advance of evidence. In spite of this consensus, harsh condemnations appear unlikely to eliminate the availability of stem cell transplantations or to dissuade all patients, many desperate, from pursuing them. And while it is true that some patients opting for stem cell transplants will be under- or uninformed about the current scientific knowledge regarding risks, benefits, alternatives, downstream implications, etc., there also seem to be cases where patients are adequately informed and opt for stem cell transplantation in spite of the dearth of evidence. The authors further note that condemnations are likely to limit opportunities to engage those patients receiving stem cell transplants in observational studies, limiting this opportunity to gather even weak scientific evidence.
The disconnect between the apparent consensus among members of the scientific and ethics communities and some patients, both those who are adequately informed and those who are under-/uninformed, suggests that communications among these parties are less than ideal. The authors recommend that scientists and ethicists “initiate an open discourse that partners with patients and their social networks in exploring what we know and what we don't know” (Murdoch and Scott 2010). While a sound suggestion, it leaves much unsaid about the best methods for success. In other words, the notion of an open discourse is great, but what practical steps can members of the scientific and ethics communities take in order to actually make this happen?
Internet-based social media present outstanding opportunities for members of the scientific and ethics communities to engage in an open discourse with patients and their social networks. One of the basic tenets of social media is that it uses the Web 2.0 ideology and architecture to convert broadcast media from the traditional, one-way transmission into a more open and egalitarian conversation. Various applications (Facebook, Twitter, blogs, etc.) provide a relatively level playing field and connect up the players for these conversations. The two-way exchange of content means that scientists and ethicists can often freely and easily enter into active conversations. They can bring their expertise to offer explanations, updates, and clarifications about the current state of stem cell science. In addition, scientists and ethicists will be able to receive direct feedback from the public, including such areas as public concerns and hopes for the types and timing of anticipated benefits and risks. The state of the science, public opinion, and the ongoing social media conversations are all highly dynamic, suggesting that social media engagement needs to be thought of as a continuing endeavor....
|
