Abstract

Recent books, articles and plays about the ‘immortal’ HeLa cell line have prompted renewed interest in the history of tissue culture methods that were first employed in 1907 and became common experimental tools during the twentieth century. Many of these sources claim tissue cultures like HeLa had a “troubled past” because medical researchers did not seek informed consent before using tissues in research, contravening a long held desire for self-determination on the part of patients and the public. In this article, I argue these claims are unfair and misleading. No professional guidelines required informed consent for tissue culture during the early and mid twentieth century, and popular sources expressed no concern at the widespread use of human tissues in research. When calls for informed consent did emerge in the 1970s and 1980s, moreover, they reflected specific political changes and often emanated from medical researchers themselves. I conclude by arguing that more balanced histories of tissue culture can make a decisive contribution to public debates today: by refuting a false dichotomy between science and its publics, and showing how ethical concepts such as informed consent arise from a historically specific engagement between professional and social groups.

Highlights

  • Recent books, articles and plays about the ‘immortal’ HeLa cell line have prompted renewed interest in the history of tissue culture methods that were first employed in 1907 and became common experimental tools during the twentieth century

  • Certain bioethicists began to question whether patients had a right to control the fate of excised surgical materials and urged medical researchers to adopt informed consent measures to ensure that tissue culture research appeared ‘‘legally permissible and morally sensitive’’ [53], either by approaching patients before operations or distributing consent forms to the resident surgeon

  • Human tissues today can be used in countless projects, in the arts as well as sciences, and their meanings vary according to the particular significance they hold for specific actors at different times and places: for clinicians, patients, scientists, museum audiences, pro-life activists, the media, bioethicists and so on

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Articles and plays about the ‘immortal’ HeLa cell line have prompted renewed interest in the history of tissue culture methods that were first employed in 1907 and became common experimental tools during the twentieth century. In addition to fostering renewed discussion of HeLa in newspapers and magazines, in theatres and on television, Skloot’s book drew attention to the ethics of tissue culture, and questions about whether or not scientists should obtain informed consent from patients before using their tissues in research.

Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call