- Email: [email protected]
A code of ethics for scientists?
EDITORIAL
A code of ethics for scientists? Published by Elsevier Ltd. The Boulevard, Langford Lane, Kidlington, OX5 1GB, UK Editorial Managing Editor Cordelia Sealy E-mail: [email protected] Editor Catherine Reinhold E-mail: [email protected] Deputy Editor Jonathan Wood E-mail: [email protected] Assistant Editor Katerina Busuttil E-mail: [email protected] Production/Design Controller Colin Williams E-mail: [email protected] Advertising Advertisements Manager Kevin Partridge E-mail: [email protected] Advertisement Sales, USA John Lucas E-mail: [email protected] Advertisement Sales, Europe David Kay E-mail: [email protected] Free circulation enquiries Nano Today, Tower House, Sovereign Park, Market Harborough LE16 9EF, UK Tel: +44 (0)1858 439 601 Fax: +44 (0)1858 434 958 E-mail: [email protected] Subscription orders & payments Price: 70 / US$85 Europe/ROW Tel: +31 20 485 3757 USA Tel: +1 212 633 3730 © Elsevier Ltd. 2007 Nano Today is owned and published by Elsevier Ltd. All material published in Nano Today is copyright Elsevier Ltd. This journal and the individual contributions contained in it are protected under copyright by Elsevier Ltd, and the following terms and conditions apply to their use: Photocopying: Single photocopies of single articles may be made for personal use as allowed by national copyright laws. Permission of the Publisher and payment of a fee is required for all other photocopying, including multiple or systematic copying, copying for advertising or promotional purposes, resale, and all forms of document delivery. Special rates are available for educational institutions that wish to make photocopies for non-profit educational classroom use. Permissions may be sought directly from Elsevier Global Rights Department, P.O. Box 800, Oxford OX5 1DX, UK; phone: (+44) 1865 843830, fax: (+44) 1865 853333, e-mail: [email protected]. You may also contact Global Rights directly through Elsevier’s homepage (http://www.elsevier.com), by selecting ‘Obtaining Permissions’. In the USA, users may clear permissions and make payments through the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc., 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, USA; phone: (+1) (978) 7508400, fax: (+1) (978) 7504744, and in the UK through the Copyright Licensing Agency Rapid Clearance Service (CLARCS), 90 Tottenham Court Road, London W1P 0LP, UK; phone: +44 (0)20 7631 5555; fax: +44 (0)20 7631 5500. Other countries may have a local reprographic rights agency for payments. Derivative Works: Subscribers may reproduce tables of contents or prepare lists of articles including abstracts for internal circulation within their institutions. Permission of the Publisher is required for resale or distribution outside the institution. Permission of the Publisher is required for all other derivative works, including compilations and translations. Electronic Storage or Usage: Permission of the Publisher is required to store or use electronically any material contained in this journal, including any article or part of an article. Except as outlined above, no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission of the Publisher. Address permissions requests to: Elsevier Global Rights Department, at the mail, fax and e-mail addresses noted above. Notice: No responsibility is assumed by the Publisher for any injury and/or damage to persons or property as a matter of products liability, negligence or otherwise, or from any use or operation of any methods, products, instructions or ideas contained in the material herein. Because of rapid advances in the medical sciences, in particular, independent verification of diagnoses and drug dosages should be made. Although all advertising material is expected to conform to ethical (medical) standards, inclusion in this publication does not constitute a guarantee or endorsement of the quality or value of such product or of the claims made of it by its manufacturer. Printed by Headley Brothers Ltd, Kent, UK ISSN 1748-0132 Journal number: 04085
Asking scientists to abide by an ethical code seems sensible, but will it actually achieve anything? Catherine Reinhold | Editor, Nano Today | [email protected] The UK Government’s chief scientific advisor, Sir David King, has launched a code of ethics for scientists – much like the well-known Hippocratic oath for doctors. The proposal lays down seven ‘commandments’ by which scientists should govern their work. The principles are straightforward but suggest that scientists should be more proactive in their efforts to uphold the good name of science as a whole.
The code 1. Act with skill and care, keep skills up to date. 2. Prevent corrupt practice and declare conflicts of interest. 3. Respect and acknowledge the work of other scientists. 4. Ensure that research is justified and lawful. 5. Minimize impacts on people, animals, and the environment. 6. Discuss issues science raises for society.
However, the question is: does such a code achieve anything? The code would be voluntary and wouldn’t be backed by an official organization to impose sanctions on those who break it unlike the Hippocratic oath, which is enforced in the UK by the General Medical Council. Most scientists already work to a code of conduct, either officially or unwritten. For instance, all members of the Royal Society of Chemistry in the UK agree to abide by a code of conduct. It appears that it is only a very tiny minority of the scientific community who would even consider breaking the general ideas laid out in the code. The argument in favor of such a code is that it provides a – possibly international – framework to which all scientists should work. It could also become a vehicle by which scientists could question, or even decline, work that may break the code. It does make you wonder where we would be now if such a code had been implemented a century or two ago. Would there have been the breakthroughs in medical
7. Do not mislead; present evidence honestly.
science, nuclear technology, or even nanoscience if such a code had existed? The fifth ‘law’ of the code states that scientists should “minimize impacts on people, animals and the environment”. But, realistically, at what point can a scientist tell whether their work is going to have an impact on people or the environment? The idea that this code encourages scientists to be more open about the issues their work raises and to question its validity and necessity can only be a good thing. There is no harm in supporting efforts to raise public support for science. Overall, I totally agree that implementing an ethical code for scientists is an excellent idea, but to give it weight, it needs to be international and supported by an organization that can enforce it.
Editorial Advisory Panel Takuzo Aida University of Tokyo, Japan Gang Bao Georgia Institute of Technology Flemming Besenbacher University of Aarhus, Denmark Charles M. Lieber Harvard University Luis Liz-Marzán Universidade de Vigo, Spain Dan Luo Cornell University
Andrew Maynard Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars E. W. Meijer Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands Mervyn Miles University of Bristol, UK Chad Mirkin Northwestern University C. N. R. Rao Jawaharlal Nehru Centre for Advanced Scientific Research, India
John Rogers University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign Erkki Ruoslahti Burnham Institute for Medical Research Francesco Stellacci Massachusetts Institute of Technology Mauricio Terrones Instituto Potosino de Investigación Científica y Tecnológica, Mexico
Zhong Lin Wang Georgia Institute of Technology Mark Welland University of Cambridge, UK George Whitesides Harvard University Younan Xia University of Washington Peidong Yang University of California, Berkeley
OCTOBER 2007 | VOLUME 2 | NUMBER 5
1
A code of ethics for scientists? Published by Elsevier Ltd. The Boulevard, Langford Lane, Kidlington, OX5 1GB, UK Editorial Managing Editor Cordelia Sealy E-mail: [email protected] Editor Catherine Reinhold E-mail: [email protected] Deputy Editor Jonathan Wood E-mail: [email protected] Assistant Editor Katerina Busuttil E-mail: [email protected] Production/Design Controller Colin Williams E-mail: [email protected] Advertising Advertisements Manager Kevin Partridge E-mail: [email protected] Advertisement Sales, USA John Lucas E-mail: [email protected] Advertisement Sales, Europe David Kay E-mail: [email protected] Free circulation enquiries Nano Today, Tower House, Sovereign Park, Market Harborough LE16 9EF, UK Tel: +44 (0)1858 439 601 Fax: +44 (0)1858 434 958 E-mail: [email protected] Subscription orders & payments Price: 70 / US$85 Europe/ROW Tel: +31 20 485 3757 USA Tel: +1 212 633 3730 © Elsevier Ltd. 2007 Nano Today is owned and published by Elsevier Ltd. All material published in Nano Today is copyright Elsevier Ltd. This journal and the individual contributions contained in it are protected under copyright by Elsevier Ltd, and the following terms and conditions apply to their use: Photocopying: Single photocopies of single articles may be made for personal use as allowed by national copyright laws. Permission of the Publisher and payment of a fee is required for all other photocopying, including multiple or systematic copying, copying for advertising or promotional purposes, resale, and all forms of document delivery. Special rates are available for educational institutions that wish to make photocopies for non-profit educational classroom use. Permissions may be sought directly from Elsevier Global Rights Department, P.O. Box 800, Oxford OX5 1DX, UK; phone: (+44) 1865 843830, fax: (+44) 1865 853333, e-mail: [email protected]. You may also contact Global Rights directly through Elsevier’s homepage (http://www.elsevier.com), by selecting ‘Obtaining Permissions’. In the USA, users may clear permissions and make payments through the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc., 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, USA; phone: (+1) (978) 7508400, fax: (+1) (978) 7504744, and in the UK through the Copyright Licensing Agency Rapid Clearance Service (CLARCS), 90 Tottenham Court Road, London W1P 0LP, UK; phone: +44 (0)20 7631 5555; fax: +44 (0)20 7631 5500. Other countries may have a local reprographic rights agency for payments. Derivative Works: Subscribers may reproduce tables of contents or prepare lists of articles including abstracts for internal circulation within their institutions. Permission of the Publisher is required for resale or distribution outside the institution. Permission of the Publisher is required for all other derivative works, including compilations and translations. Electronic Storage or Usage: Permission of the Publisher is required to store or use electronically any material contained in this journal, including any article or part of an article. Except as outlined above, no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission of the Publisher. Address permissions requests to: Elsevier Global Rights Department, at the mail, fax and e-mail addresses noted above. Notice: No responsibility is assumed by the Publisher for any injury and/or damage to persons or property as a matter of products liability, negligence or otherwise, or from any use or operation of any methods, products, instructions or ideas contained in the material herein. Because of rapid advances in the medical sciences, in particular, independent verification of diagnoses and drug dosages should be made. Although all advertising material is expected to conform to ethical (medical) standards, inclusion in this publication does not constitute a guarantee or endorsement of the quality or value of such product or of the claims made of it by its manufacturer. Printed by Headley Brothers Ltd, Kent, UK ISSN 1748-0132 Journal number: 04085
Asking scientists to abide by an ethical code seems sensible, but will it actually achieve anything? Catherine Reinhold | Editor, Nano Today | [email protected] The UK Government’s chief scientific advisor, Sir David King, has launched a code of ethics for scientists – much like the well-known Hippocratic oath for doctors. The proposal lays down seven ‘commandments’ by which scientists should govern their work. The principles are straightforward but suggest that scientists should be more proactive in their efforts to uphold the good name of science as a whole.
The code 1. Act with skill and care, keep skills up to date. 2. Prevent corrupt practice and declare conflicts of interest. 3. Respect and acknowledge the work of other scientists. 4. Ensure that research is justified and lawful. 5. Minimize impacts on people, animals, and the environment. 6. Discuss issues science raises for society.
However, the question is: does such a code achieve anything? The code would be voluntary and wouldn’t be backed by an official organization to impose sanctions on those who break it unlike the Hippocratic oath, which is enforced in the UK by the General Medical Council. Most scientists already work to a code of conduct, either officially or unwritten. For instance, all members of the Royal Society of Chemistry in the UK agree to abide by a code of conduct. It appears that it is only a very tiny minority of the scientific community who would even consider breaking the general ideas laid out in the code. The argument in favor of such a code is that it provides a – possibly international – framework to which all scientists should work. It could also become a vehicle by which scientists could question, or even decline, work that may break the code. It does make you wonder where we would be now if such a code had been implemented a century or two ago. Would there have been the breakthroughs in medical
7. Do not mislead; present evidence honestly.
science, nuclear technology, or even nanoscience if such a code had existed? The fifth ‘law’ of the code states that scientists should “minimize impacts on people, animals and the environment”. But, realistically, at what point can a scientist tell whether their work is going to have an impact on people or the environment? The idea that this code encourages scientists to be more open about the issues their work raises and to question its validity and necessity can only be a good thing. There is no harm in supporting efforts to raise public support for science. Overall, I totally agree that implementing an ethical code for scientists is an excellent idea, but to give it weight, it needs to be international and supported by an organization that can enforce it.
Editorial Advisory Panel Takuzo Aida University of Tokyo, Japan Gang Bao Georgia Institute of Technology Flemming Besenbacher University of Aarhus, Denmark Charles M. Lieber Harvard University Luis Liz-Marzán Universidade de Vigo, Spain Dan Luo Cornell University
Andrew Maynard Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars E. W. Meijer Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands Mervyn Miles University of Bristol, UK Chad Mirkin Northwestern University C. N. R. Rao Jawaharlal Nehru Centre for Advanced Scientific Research, India
John Rogers University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign Erkki Ruoslahti Burnham Institute for Medical Research Francesco Stellacci Massachusetts Institute of Technology Mauricio Terrones Instituto Potosino de Investigación Científica y Tecnológica, Mexico
Zhong Lin Wang Georgia Institute of Technology Mark Welland University of Cambridge, UK George Whitesides Harvard University Younan Xia University of Washington Peidong Yang University of California, Berkeley
OCTOBER 2007 | VOLUME 2 | NUMBER 5
1