What is an ethical dilemma? An ethical dilemma is a situation where a choice must be made between two options, but neither resolves the problem ethically. The use of the 1918 influenza as dual use research is the eptiome of an ethical dilemma. The 1918 influenza was a pandemic that killed approximately 20-50 million people (Trilla et al. 2008). Recently, it was revived from extinction to be used as dual use research. Dual use research is a termed applied to research that is intended for benefit, but can be easily misused (Science Safety). On one hand, the public release of H5N1 virus could possibly lead to the strain being synthesized and the creation of a pandemic but, on the other hand, the research could be used to create early detection
…show more content…
In regards to the ethics of using sarin nerve gas to kill people versus the use of bullets, these articles support my claim that the use of sarin nerve gas is so much worse than the use of bullets. Article 3 of the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights states “Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person” and Article 5 states “No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment” (UN). The use of sarin nerve gas clearly contravenes both of these articles. What is Sarin Nerve Gas? Sarin is a clear, odorless, man-made nerve agent that is classified as a chemical warfare agent (CDC) that was banned by the Chemical Weapons Convention in 1993 (UN). Slight exposure to this gas could result in a person having a runny nose, eye pain, coughing and etc. but extreme exposure cases may lead to paralysis, convulsion and respiratory failure, which could all lead to death by asphyxiation (CDC). Article 3 supports my claim because when sarin nerve gas attacks happen the people around would not be aware until the symptoms start setting in and citizens have the right to feel free breathing in air. Article 5 also supports my claim because chocking to death after being chemically poisoned, is the definition of torture and cruel inhuman treatment. An attack with sarin nerve gas could kill hundreds, even thousands, within minutes without a warning. While the killing of people with bullets is still a horrible way to die, if a person were to attack with guns, there is a higher chance of more people surviving against bullets than an odorless, clear toxic
In regards to the ethics of using sarin nerve gas to kill people versus the use of bullets, these articles support my claim that the use of sarin nerve gas is so much worse than the use of bullets. Article 3 of the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights states “Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person” and Article 5 states “No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment” (UN). The use of sarin nerve gas clearly contravenes both of these articles. What is Sarin Nerve Gas? Sarin is a clear, odorless, man-made nerve agent that is classified as a chemical warfare agent (CDC) that was banned by the Chemical Weapons Convention in 1993 (UN). Slight exposure to this gas could result in a person having a runny nose, eye pain, coughing and etc. but extreme exposure cases may lead to paralysis, convulsion and respiratory failure, which could all lead to death by asphyxiation (CDC). Article 3 supports my claim because when sarin nerve gas attacks happen the people around would not be aware until the symptoms start setting in and citizens have the right to feel free breathing in air. Article 5 also supports my claim because chocking to death after being chemically poisoned, is the definition of torture and cruel inhuman treatment. An attack with sarin nerve gas could kill hundreds, even thousands, within minutes without a warning. While the killing of people with bullets is still a horrible way to die, if a person were to attack with guns, there is a higher chance of more people surviving against bullets than an odorless, clear toxic