Although research findings have always been subject to abuse,
scientific advances and recent events have increased concern about the
perils of some biomedical knowledge. The Council on Ethical and Judicial
Affairs (CEJA) addresses this potential in its guidelines for
physician–researchers (PRs). The guidelines do not advance many
novel ideas or provide substantive guidance for PRs. Advocacy for
professionalism, weighing costs and benefits, and balanced oversight are
uncontroversial and have been proposed before. The difficult task is to
define what they require, and here the guidelines are vague. We discuss
critically two issues that deserve careful attention.Authors contributed equally to this work. The views expressed herein are the authors' own and do not
necessarily reflect the views of the National Institutes of Health, U.S.
Public Health Service, or the Department of Health and Human
Services.