Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current issue
    • Past issues
    • Early releases
    • Collections
    • Sections
    • Blog
    • Infographics & illustrations
    • Podcasts
    • COVID-19 articles
    • Obituary notices
  • Authors & Reviewers
    • Overview for authors
    • Submission guidelines
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Forms
    • Editorial process
    • Editorial policies
    • Peer review process
    • Publication fees
    • Reprint requests
    • Open access
    • Patient engagement
  • Physicians & Subscribers
    • Benefits for Canadian physicians
    • CPD Credits for CMA Members
    • Subscribe to CMAJ Print
    • Subscription prices
    • Obituary notices
  • Alerts
    • Email alerts
    • RSS
  • JAMC
    • À propos
    • Numéro en cours
    • Archives
    • Sections
    • Abonnement
    • Alertes
    • Trousse média 2023
    • Avis de décès
  • CMAJ JOURNALS
    • CMAJ Open
    • CJS
    • JAMC
    • JPN

User menu

Search

  • Advanced search
CMAJ
  • CMAJ JOURNALS
    • CMAJ Open
    • CJS
    • JAMC
    • JPN
CMAJ

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current issue
    • Past issues
    • Early releases
    • Collections
    • Sections
    • Blog
    • Infographics & illustrations
    • Podcasts
    • COVID-19 articles
    • Obituary notices
  • Authors & Reviewers
    • Overview for authors
    • Submission guidelines
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Forms
    • Editorial process
    • Editorial policies
    • Peer review process
    • Publication fees
    • Reprint requests
    • Open access
    • Patient engagement
  • Physicians & Subscribers
    • Benefits for Canadian physicians
    • CPD Credits for CMA Members
    • Subscribe to CMAJ Print
    • Subscription prices
    • Obituary notices
  • Alerts
    • Email alerts
    • RSS
  • JAMC
    • À propos
    • Numéro en cours
    • Archives
    • Sections
    • Abonnement
    • Alertes
    • Trousse média 2023
    • Avis de décès
  • Visit CMAJ on Facebook
  • Follow CMAJ on Twitter
  • Follow CMAJ on Instagram
  • Listen to CMAJ podcasts
Editorial

Dismantling the Helsinki Declaration

CMAJ November 11, 2003 169 (10) 997;
  • Article
  • Responses
  • Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Had Moses come down from the mountain with the Ten Commandments bristling with footnotes, his vision of a new moral order might have come to naught. Since 1964, the Helsinki Declaration has been the stone tablet of medical research ethics; if not quite Mosaic in stature, it has exerted a far-reaching and constructive influence on the conduct of research involving human participants.1 Until 1999 the Declaration remained essentially unchanged, but a more recent compulsion to “clarify” the document threatens to weaken its authority.

Formal ethical guidelines for research did not exist until the Nuremberg trials, in response to Nazi physicians who conducted horrific pseudoscientific medical experiments on concentration camp internees. No one who has seen the evidence of this (films made by the physician “researchers” of the Third Reich can be seen at the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum www.ushmm.org) would wonder that the military tribunal felt compelled to issue a set of principles for research on humans: the Nuremberg Code (http://ohsr.od.nih.gov/nuremberg.php3).

The burgeoning of medical research and the development of new research methods during the 1950s prompted the World Medical Association to develop an expanded code of ethical principles; these were proclaimed by the WMA at their meeting in Helsinki in 1964 (www.wma.net/e/policy/b3.htm). The most notable modifications of the Declaration were made in 2000 in response to new ethical challenges stemming from HIV- and AIDS-related research being conducted in very poor countries. Among these was a new statement (paragraph 30) that, on completion of a clinical trial, study participants should be provided with the “best proven prophylactic, diagnostic and therapeutic methods identified by the study.” Under this principle, patients enrolled in a trial of a new antiretroviral therapy, for example, would be assured that at the end of the trial they could continue to receive the drug for the duration of their illness or life. Prior to the revisions of the Declaration in 2000, study participants had no such guarantee. In wealthy countries, continuing access to study interventions are generally assured by the near-universal availability of health care. This is rarely the case in the developing world; thus, the need for a clear statement that places responsibility for providing continuing treatment of study subjects on researchers and their sponsors.

In 2000, paragraph 30 was strongly supported by many medical association members of the WMA, including the CMA. But objections were raised, notably by the US Department of Health and Human Services and multinational pharmaceutical companies, that paragraph 30 would in some contexts impede useful research. In September of this year, a working group of the WMA proposed a “note of clarification” and an “amended version” of paragraph 30. Under the new terms, patients enrolled in a study would receive “whenever possible… the benefits that resulted” and would be given access to any “available” best-proven therapy. Effectively, these “clarifications” nullify the force of paragraph 30. They allow researchers and their sponsors to weasel out of providing continuing care to study subjects wherever administrative, economic or political circumstances create difficulties.

That the proposed changes were not accepted is largely to the credit of the Argentinean and Brazilian medical associations, who spoke out forcefully against the footnotes and against all continuing efforts to weaken the Declaration. However, abetted by the support of national associations such as the British Medical Association and by the silence of some others — including the CMA — the dismantling of Helsinki has not been stopped. A subcommittee will continue to study paragraph 30 (and possibly others) and return for another attempt next year.

Canada, which has played a leading role in developing guidelines for medical research on human subjects,2 and the CMA, which advocated for paragraph 30 in 2000, should take a strong stand next year and protest any further footnotes to Helsinki. It is the role of research ethics boards to take local circumstances into account when considering a study proposal. Medical associations must not permit special interest groups to turn a universally accepted statement of principles for the conduct of research on humans into a set of “moral concessions that weaken the traditional universality of the Declaration … [and damage] the reputation and trustworthiness of the medical profession.”3 Thou shalt not discontinue effective treatment of study subjects upon termination of the research. Period. — CMAJ

References

  1. 1.↵
    Human D, Fluss SS. The World Medical Association's Declaration of Helsinki: Historical and Contemporary Perspectives, 5th draft. World Medical Association; 2001 Jul 24. Available: www.wma.net/e/ethicsunit/helsinki.htm (accessed 2003 Oct 21).
  2. 2.↵
    Law Commission of Canada. The governance of health research involving human subjects. Ottawa: The Commission; 2000.
  3. 3.↵
    Submission from the Argentinean Medical Association. In: Comments on the Workgroup Report on the Revision of Paragraph 30 of the Declaration of Helsinki. World Medical Association; 2003.
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Canadian Medical Association Journal: 169 (10)
CMAJ
Vol. 169, Issue 10
11 Nov 2003
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author

Article tools

Respond to this article
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
To sign up for email alerts or to access your current email alerts, enter your email address below:
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on CMAJ.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Dismantling the Helsinki Declaration
(Your Name) has sent you a message from CMAJ
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the CMAJ web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Dismantling the Helsinki Declaration
CMAJ Nov 2003, 169 (10) 997;

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
‍ Request Permissions
Share
Dismantling the Helsinki Declaration
CMAJ Nov 2003, 169 (10) 997;
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like

Jump to section

  • Article
    • References
  • Responses
  • Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • The Declaration of Helsinki: an update on paragraph 30
  • Getting a fix on good governance
  • Revisiting Helsinki
  • Revisiting Helsinki
  • Revisiting Helsinki
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • “Less is better” is the best message when talking to patients about alcohol
  • Nouvelle politique sur l’utilisation des outils d’intelligence artificielle dans les manuscrits soumis au JAMC
  • Without more acute care beds, hospitals are on their own to grapple with emergency department crises
Show more Éditorial

Similar Articles

Collections

  • Topics
    • Journalology & publication ethics
    • Medical ethics

 

View Latest Classified Ads

Content

  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • Collections
  • Sections
  • Blog
  • Podcasts
  • Alerts
  • RSS
  • Early releases

Information for

  • Advertisers
  • Authors
  • Reviewers
  • CMA Members
  • CPD credits
  • Media
  • Reprint requests
  • Subscribers

About

  • General Information
  • Journal staff
  • Editorial Board
  • Advisory Panels
  • Governance Council
  • Journal Oversight
  • Careers
  • Contact
  • Copyright and Permissions
CMAJ Group

Copyright 2023, CMA Impact Inc. or its licensors. All rights reserved. ISSN 1488-2329 (e) 0820-3946 (p)

All editorial matter in CMAJ represents the opinions of the authors and not necessarily those of the Canadian Medical Association or its subsidiaries.

To receive any of these resources in an accessible format, please contact us at CMAJ Group, 500-1410 Blair Towers Place, Ottawa ON, K1J 9B9; p: 1-888-855-2555; e: [email protected]

CMA Civility, Accessibility, Privacy

 

Powered by HighWire