You have accessJournal of UrologyMale Voiding Dysfunction (BPH & Incontinence) & Infection1 Apr 20121048 RISING FROM THE ASHES OF ATROCITIES IN HUMAN RESEARCH THE DEVELOPMENT OF INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARDS Sutchin R. Patel and Stephen Y. Nakada Sutchin R. PatelSutchin R. Patel Lake Bluff, IL More articles by this author and Stephen Y. NakadaStephen Y. Nakada Madison, WI More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2012.02.1153AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES With the advances in medical science and an increase in the experimentation on humans, we have also witnessed the maturation in the ethics of human subject research. The historical events of the twentieth century have thus led to the codification of laws to protect human research subjects and the development of the institutional review board (IRB). METHODS A systematic search of published and online material was conducted regarding events and laws that were related to the development of institutional review boards and codes protecting human research subjects. RESULTS From Hammurabi's Code (18th Century BC) to the Hippocratic Oath (5th Century BC) to the Roman physician Celsus (1st Century AD), justifying the use of criminals for medical experiments, there are many examples of the regulation of medical practice in ancient times. The scientific revolution of the 17th century led to a systematic method of investigation and by the end of the 19th century, the amount of research on humans continued to expand. Sir William Osler in 1907, stated that “the final test of every new procedure, medical or surgical, must be made on man, but never before it has been tried on animals.” He also added that “full consent” must be obtained from patients, based on “full knowledge of the circumstances.” During the Nuremberg Trials (1945-1946), German physicians were tried for crimes against humanity including the conduction of medical experiments on thousands of concentration camp prisoners without their consent. This would result in the Nuremberg Code, the first internationally recognized code of research ethics. The Tuskegee Syphilis Study (1932-1972), conducted by the U.S. Public Health Service, used disadvantaged, rural African-American males to study the untreated course of syphilis. Subjects were not told about their disease and even when penicillin became available in the 1950s, the study continued until 1972 with participants being denied treatment. Henry Beecher, an anesthesiologist, examined 50 published “examples of unethical or questionable ethical studies.” His article would lead the NIH in 1965 to develop guidelines requiring approval of protocols for research on human subjects before a study could begin. In 1974 the National Research Act was passed by Congress and prompted the establishment of IRBs at the local level and required IRB review and approval for all federally funded research involving human participants. CONCLUSIONS Our current IRBs rose from the ashes of the atrocities in human subject experimentation and will continue to evolve with our future scientific progress. © 2012 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 187Issue 4SApril 2012Page: e425 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2012 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Sutchin R. Patel Lake Bluff, IL More articles by this author Stephen Y. Nakada Madison, WI More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...