Schaub 6:00 L21
THE ETHICAL DILEMA
Christopher LePrevost (cal140@pitt.edu)
from the inside due to the gold heating up [2]. A similar
premise is possible except using the photoreactivity of the
THE SITUATION
GNPs and exposing them to a laser. As long as the GNPs get
It is 9 o’clock at night and I am sitting at a table in the lab and into the cancer, then it can be destroyed. For places that light
I am finishing up an experiment. I look through my cannot reach, the GNPs can be modified to enter the nucleus
microscope to find something peculiar. The cells treated with of the cancer cells and stop them from multiplying. Stopping
the Gold nanoparticles are not acting normally. I run some cancer from multiplying is essentially stopping the cancer in
tests the next day to find that the gold nanoparticles are its tracks [2]. Additionally, GNPs are very useful for drug
actually inhibiting key processes in the cells. If they were to delivery and could be developed to specifically target cancer
be used in a living human being, the effects could be cells for more effective treatment of the cancer. Another
dangerous. I show the cytotoxicity findings to the lead important ability of these particles would be to deliver
researcher, to which he tells me to look over the information medications directly and precisely to the affected area to cure
and give him a report on the possible ethical issues regarding cells from the inside. These “designer drugs” would also help
to limit negative effects of the medication as it would only
the situation.
affect the specific affected cells instead of just ingesting the
medication and affecting a massive number of cells.
THE PROCESS
The costs
The process I would use to go about analyzing this situation
would consist of three parts before I could come to an accurate
and complete conclusion as to the ethics of the situation. First,
I would go through the pros and cons and debate the benefits
and dangers of the use of GNPs. Second, I would review and
apply both the bioengineering code of ethics and the
engineering code of ethics and apply the two to the current
situation. Finally, I would consult other sources, such as other
articles on similar issues or personal experiences. Only after
doing all of the previous things, could I make a complete and
thorough
As mentioned in the situation, the theoretical problem is the
cytotoxicity of the particles when they enter the cells.
Essentially, the GNPs inhibit key processes in the cell, enough
that the cell is essentially useless, but does not die. If the
GNPs were to be used to treat an illness by using them to
deliver a drug to the cells, the cells that were cured would
essentially be useless. The disease would be gone, but the
cells would still be unusable by the body. The effects of these
useless cells is unknown, but cells not doing their jobs is never
good and can lead to very bad effects.
My thoughts
Discussion
The first thing I would do to determine whether or not the
GNPs are ethical to use, would be to weigh out the costs
against the benefits. After doing so, I would determine if the
costs, even if outweighed by the benefits, are unacceptable.
The benefits
GNPs are an up and coming field of study and research due to
their uses and uses that we have yet to discover. The first and
major benefit of GNPs is the fact that they can be used to treat
cancer. Research into GNPs has found that “a small dose of
gold nanoparticles can activate or inhibit genes that are
involved in angiogenesis -- a complex process responsible for
the supply of oxygen and nutrients to most types of cancer”
[1]. Being able to limit the blood flow to the cancer cells
would severely limit their growth and give doctors more time
to treat the cancer. In addition to the ability to inhibit
angiogenesis, if the GNPs inside the cancer cells are exposed
to X-ray radiation, they can actually destroy the cancer cells
University of Pittsburgh, Swanson School of Engineering
2013-10-1
GNPs being able to cure cancer is a huge benefit to the
medical world and would almost outweigh any cost, in my
opinion. The ability to also deliver drugs directly to cells with
minimal collateral damage is also a very important and
beneficial use. The slight downside is that the cured cells
would be completely useless. This, however, is a null point in
the terms of cancer treatment, as the whole point is to destroy
or stop the cells from functioning, so that the cancer is cured.
In this way, the cost becomes a benefit. Additionally, the
GNPs would be a lot less damaging to the person than the
current treatment methods for treating cancer. It is only when
the GNPs are used to carry out another task, such as
implanting biosensors, or using them to treat diseases using
designer drugs, that the costs come into play. Even then, a
useless cell is better than an infected cell and a few useless
cells is better than the disease spreading to other cells around
those. From a purely pros and cons stand point, GNPs are
almost perfect with the current information.
Christopher LePrevost
Applying the codes
Discussion
After considering the pros and cons of the situation and
determining the ethics of using GNPs by looking at the pros
and cons, I would the turn to the engineering codes of ethics
and look for any kinds of conflicts with the codes for both the
bioengineering code and the general engineering code. Using
these codes, I could see if GNPs cause any professional
problems or any kind of ethical conflict with the codes.
While the codes do not specifically apply to the issue of GNPs
the few canons that do affect the issue support the use of
GNPs. The bioengineering code of ethics has two canons that
apply to the issue and both support the use of GNPs in
medicine. The general engineering code also has two canons
that apply to the issue and both support the use of GNPs for
use in medicine. According to both of the related engineering
codes of ethics, the use of GNPs is ethical and should be used
to enhance the welfare of the population and advance
medicine.
The Bioengineering Code
The Bioengineering code of ethics gives canons that
specifically relate to the field of bioengineering in the fields
of healthcare, research, and in general. The first canon for the
general bioengineering code of ethics is that a bioengineer
should use their skills to enhance the safety, health and
welfare of the public. GNPs comply with this canon almost
perfectly. GNPs can greatly enhance the health and welfare of
the public by providing a cure for cancer and a more precise
cure for most other diseases. This benefit is increased even
more considering the other methods of treating cancer. The
only other canon that applies to GNPs is the second one under
the healthcare section that states to consider the larger
consequences of their work. By considering the negatives and
continuing to research the possible negative effects of the
GNPs. Considering the two canons of the Bioengineering
code of Ethics, the use of GNPs would comply with the code
and therefore be ethical as long as research continued into the
possible negative side effects of the particles.
Other influences
After consulting the codes, I would move onto consulting
other sources for help in determining the ethical issues
surrounding the GNPs. First, I would consult articles about
ethics in similar situations or just ethics in engineering in
general. Then, I would consult personal sources, such as
family members or personal experiences.
Consulting Articles
How could I come to a complete conclusion without first
consulting articles about similar situations to get additional
opinions? I would first look for articles debating the specific
topic, then move onto similar topics and then to more general
ones. For instance, I reviewed an article about a conference in
Harvard that brought many scientists together to discuss the
general ethics of bioengineering the human body. The gist of
the article is that one group argued that bioengineering could
help to enhance and evolve the human population and
improve life. The flip-side of the argument said that if we
enhance people, will we lose more than we gain, in the form
of our humanity? This can be applied to the situation of GNPs
as, while there are many benefits, there are also costs to using
them. We gain the ability to cure cancer, but we also destroy
the cells around the cancer. A similar ethical dilemma can be
found in that of stem cell research. As an article points out,
the two main moral principles behind the ethical dilemma is
to prevent suffering and to respect human life. [4] In the case
of stem cells, the problem comes in how they acquire the cells.
The stem cells come from embryos, which can come into
violation with the second moral principle. The parallel with
GNPs comes in their side effects. The GNPs ruin the cells that
they enter. Stem cells can be used to regenerate organs and
tissues perfectly, such that they can be transplanted without
the body rejecting them. GNPs can be used to cure cancer and
to treat diseases on the cellular level with precision. Both have
upsides, but both have downsides that cause ethical problems.
Fortunately, the ethical problem assoiciated with GNPs can
be solved through further research into the side effects,
whereas the issues with stem cells is much more complicated
and ethically charged.
The General Engineering code
The general Engineering code of ethics gives canons that
engineers of any field should uphold. The first canon of the
code states to “Hold paramount the safety, health and welfare
of the public.” [3] The GNPs are borderline in complying with
this canon. In one sense, they are extremely beneficial in their
ability to cure diseases. However, they also do have negative
downsides. The benefits though are greater than the dangers,
so in my opinion, I believe that it complies with this canon of
the code. The fifth canon of the code also applies to the issue
of GNPs. The fifth canon of the code basically states not to
deceive people with your actions. By stating the dangers of
the GNPs, then deceiving people can be avoided. Also, by
continuing to research the negative effects of GNPs, this
canon can be upheld even more so than it currently is.
Considering these two applicable canons of the code, GNPs
are ethical, if more research was done to explore the possible
downsides of GNPs in order to keep the public up-to-date on
the possible negative side effects of GNP procedures.
2
Christopher LePrevost
Consulting personal sources
Conclusion
After coming to my own conclusion from consulting the
codes of ethics, reviewing the benefits and costs, and finally
looking at other cases of ethics in similar situations, I would
consult some more personal sources. First, I would ask my
brother for his input on the situation. He has always helped
me by adding his logical opinion to the situation and allowing
me to bounce ideas off of him. It would also help due to
having someone unrelated to the topic to run my conclusion
by, as he would not be swayed by a bias. After talking to my
brother, I would talk to my friend Conor. Conor, being a
debater can help to make my decision more logical and point
out any kind of logical problems or obvious things that I may
have overlooked. Being a debater, he would be able to devil’s
advocate to my argument and try to find things wrong with it
from angles I did not think of and make sure I have them
covered. He would also be able to provide an unbiased
opinion of the situation much like my brother can. Finally, I
would listen to music and sit back in my chair and bring
everything together in my head to form my final conclusion.
After considering all of my sources and thoroughly reviewing
the benefits and costs of using GNPs in medicine, I conclude
that using GNPs to treat diseases is perfectly ethical based on
the current information. The ability to cure cancer and
precisely treat diseases on the cellular level far outweighs the
fact that it can damage the cells it treats. My decision is also
supported by both the bioengineering and general engineering
codes of ethics. The fact that the one downside of the GNPs
can actually help in fighting cancer and the fact that it doesn’t
actually destroy the cells when used in designer drugs
removes any question from the debate. If, in the future,
information comes out showing more downsides to using
GNPs in medicine, then the ethics should be reconsidered,
however, until that time comes, GNPs should be considered
ethical to use in medicine.
3
Christopher LePrevost
REFERENCES
[1] “Gold Nanoparticles Bring Scientists Closer to a
Treatment for Cancer.” (2011). ScienceDaily. (online article).
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/07/1107050715
18.htm
[2] “Drug Delivery: Why Gold Nanoparticles Can Penetrate
Cell Walls.” (2013). ScienceDaily. (online article).
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/08/1308221422
13.htm
[3] “NSPE Code of Ethics for Engineers.” (2007). NSPE.
(online
article).
http://www.nspe.org/Ethics/CodeofEthics/index.html
[4] Hug, K. “Embryonic stem cell research: an ethical
dilemma.” (2011) EuroStemCell. (online article).
http://www.eurostemcell.org/factsheet/embryonic-stem-cellresearch-ethical-dilemma
4
Christopher LePrevost
ADDITIONAL SOURCES
M. Spivak, R. Bubnov, I. Yemets, et al. (2013).
“Development and testing of gold nanoparticles for drug
delivery and treatment of heart failure: a theranostic potential
for PPP cardiology.” EPMA Journal (online article) DOI:
10.1186/1878-5085-4-20
“Using Gold Nanoparticles to Hit Cancer Where It Hurts.”
(2010).
ScienceDaily.
(online
article)http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/02/10021
6140402.htm
E. Hutter, S. Boridy, S. Labrecque, et al. (2010). “Microglial
Response to Gold Nanoparticles.” ascnano. (online article).
DOI: 10.1021/nn901869f
Y. Li, H. Schluesener, S. Xu. (2010). “Gold nanoparticlebased biosensors.” Gold Bulletin. (online article). DOI:
10.1007/BF03214964
“Biomedical Engineering Society Code of Ethics.” (2004).
BMES.
(online
article).
http://bmes.org/files/2004%20Approved%20%20Code%20o
f%20Ethics(2).pdf
5
Christopher LePrevost
Acknowledgements
First, I would like to thank my brother Kyle
LePrevost for being a soundboard for my ideas and
being a source of encouragement. Second, I would
like to thank Conor Lavelle for playing devil’s
advocate and making me think a bit more about the
subject than I had been. I would also like to thank
Olivia Vilella for motivating me to work harder on
this essay. Finally, I would like to thank Mr. Torgue
for being a constant source of encouragement and
motivation.
6