Henrietta Lacks Essay

1030 Words5 Pages

In 1951, Henrietta Lacks unknowingly made one of the largest scientific contributions to science in the past century. Doctors at John Hopkins Hospital took her cancer cells, which never died. Her line of cells became the most significant line of cells in history. In science today, they are known as HeLa cells. Those tiny cancer cells made a tremendous impact. HeLa has aided in the development of the polio vaccine, helped to understand HIV, helped scientists find the link HPV link to cancer and were the first cells to be cloned, to name a few. HeLa cells helped contribute vast amount of knowledge to the scientific community, yet all the while her family had no clue that Henrietta Lack’s cancer cells were still alive. Her family couldn't afford …show more content…

After World War Two and the Nazi experiments on concentration camp prisoners, the Nuremberg code was developed for the use of humans in scientific research. The code centered on human consent and safety, with successful trials with animals prior to using humans. However, most doctors in the U.S felt the code didn't t apply to them, that they were above the international code. In Henrietta’s day, there weren’t laws that protected research participants. In her time, it wasn't mandatory for doctors to have patients sign consent forms. Patients could have been participating in scientific research without even knowing it! In 1979, The Belmont Report: Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects of Research was published by the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. The report was a series of laws and ethical issues for the use of humans in research. The report discusses how human research should have respect for persons involved. The test subjects should be treated as autonomous agents, and those who don't have that power (such as people with disabilities) are entitled to protection. Secondly, the report discuses that safety must be kept in mind. Scientific advancement cannot happen unless the experiments are safe. Thirdly, participants have to be chosen fairly, not from populations who could be coerced into participating, such as prisoners or institutionalized children. And, of course, consent is