Document Detail


Fallacies in the arguments for new technology: the case of proton therapy.
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  19880705     Owner:  NLM     Status:  In-Process    
Abstract/OtherAbstract:
In a seminal article in the Journal of Medical Ethics, Søren Holm and Tuja Takala analysed two protechnology arguments in bioethics: the hopeful principle and the automatic escalator. They showed how these arguments relate to problematic arguments such as the precautionary principle and the empirical slippery slope argument, and argued that they should be used with great caution. The present article investigates the recent debate on proton beam therapy, where the hopeful principle and the automatic escalator are identified. However, the debate reveals a series of other arguments that deserve similar caution. An analysis of these arguments indicates that the roots of their fallacies are to be found in the ignorance of the uncertainties about risks and benefits and an overly optimistic attitude towards technology and progress. The point is not to argue against proton therapy, but rather to point out that flawed arguments for new technologies, such as proton therapy, can actually hamper their implementation instead of promoting it. Patients deserve the best technology available, not only on the basis of the best available evidence, but also on the basis of the best arguments.
Authors:
B Hofmann
Related Documents :
18244075 - Perspectives in biomedical supercomputing.
1640405 - The new immunology.
17214255 - Public, experts, and acceptance of advanced medical technologies: the case of organ tra...
10927965 - Technology in medicine: ontology, epistemology, ethics and social philosophy at the cro...
12444355 - Tobacco and alcohol use and medical symptoms among cocaine dependent patients.
15577295 - Use of medication during pregnancy and risk of childhood leukemia (canada).
Publication Detail:
Type:  Journal Article    
Journal Detail:
Title:  Journal of medical ethics     Volume:  35     ISSN:  1473-4257     ISO Abbreviation:  J Med Ethics     Publication Date:  2009 Nov 
Date Detail:
Created Date:  2009-11-02     Completed Date:  -     Revised Date:  -    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  7513619     Medline TA:  J Med Ethics     Country:  England    
Other Details:
Languages:  eng     Pagination:  684-7     Citation Subset:  E; IM    
Affiliation:
Department of Health, Care and Nursing, University College of Gjøvik, Gjøvik, Norway. bjoern.hofmann@hig.no
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms
Descriptor/Qualifier:

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine


Previous Document:  Should we enhance animals?
Next Document:  Telecare and self-management: opportunity to change the paradigm?