With over 16 years of experience in clinical, research, and educational activities related to transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), I have written this article exploring the ethical dimensions of TMS. This article aims to provide valuable and informative content for those unfamiliar with TMS as well as those just starting in the field. Specifically, this article elaborates on four principles of medical ethics, including those applicable to TMS therapy, the disparity between public medical insurance coverage and medical indications in private practice for TMS therapy, and issues concerning research ethics in practice. I also provide recommendations regarding roles and strategies for adoption by academia and those in this field dedicated to making TMS therapy accessible to a larger patient population in a suitable manner. Lastly, it is my hope that this article will serve as a contemporary \"Ethics of TMS Neuromodulation\", resonating with the inherent human pursuit of \"truth, goodness, and beauty\" for a sound mind and spirit.

暂无摘要。

Despite clinical evidence of drug superiority, therapeutic modalities, like combination immunotherapy, are mostly considered cost-ineffective due to their high costs per life year(s) gained. This paper, taking an ethical stand, reevaluates the standard cost-effectiveness analysis with that of the more recent justice-enhanced methods and concludes by pointing out the shortcomings of the current methodologies.

BACKGROUND: In 1926, Fritz Jahr described bio-ethics (German: bio-ethik) as \"the assumption of moral obligations not only towards humans, but towards all forms of life.\" Jahr summarized his philosophy by declaring, \"Respect every living being on principle as an end in itself and treat it, if possible, as such!.\" Bioethics was thus originally an ethical system concerned with the \"problems of interference with other living beings… and generally everything related to the balance of the ecosystem\" according to the 1978 Encyclopedia of Bioethics. This definition was predicated on the work of Fritz Jahr, Menico Torchio, and Van Rensselaer Potter.
METHODS: In order to proceed with depthful analysis of the origin and major bioethical flare up, we will use critical analysis of existing literature, followed by a study trip to relevant bioethical localities (collecting photo and other documentations regarding Menico Torchio).
RESULTS: While Jahr and Potter are typically given intellectual credit for developing the field of bioethics, the eco-ethical contributions of Menico Torchio have been forgotten.This article will first trace the origins of \"bioethics\" - now commonly bifurcated into \"biomedical ethics\" and \"environmental bioethics.\" The former was developed by Tom Beauchamp from the Philosophy Department and James Childress of the Religious Studies department at Georgetown University and is based on principlism, with a narrow focus on medical settings. The latter addresses the environmental impact of the medical industry and climate change health hazards. Second, we will present a panorama of Torchio\'s significant intellectual contribution to bioethics. Menico Torchio\'s concept of bioethics synthesized work of both Jahr and Potter, advocating \"the need to expand our ethical obligations and embrace the most developed groups of animals, not only physically but also psychologically.\" Third, we will reflect on the lasting legacy of \"bioethics\" on biomedical and environmental bioethics today. Thematic elements such as interconnectedness of planetary health and human health, dedication to living in harmony with nature, and emphasis on systems and symbiosis remain unchanged from the legacy of Tochio onward.
CONCLUSIONS: Our conclusion will underscore the necessity of understanding the connections between planetary, environmental, and human health.

The increasing use of artificial intelligence (AI) in medicine is associated with new ethical challenges and responsibilities. However, special considerations and concerns should be addressed when integrating AI applications into medical education, where healthcare, AI, and education ethics collide. This commentary explores the biomedical ethical responsibilities of medical institutions in incorporating AI applications into medical education by identifying potential concerns and limitations, with the goal of implementing applicable recommendations. The recommendations presented are intended to assist in developing institutional guidelines for the ethical use of AI for medical educators and students.

Many chemicals and toxicants are released into our ecosystem and environment every day, which can cause harmful effects on human populations. Agricultural compounds are used in most crop production and have been shown to cause negative health impacts, including effects on reproduction and other pathologies. Although these chemicals can be helpful for pest and weed control, the compounds indirectly impact humans. Several compounds have been banned in the European Union but continue to be used in the United States. Recent work has shown most toxicants affect transgenerational generations more than the directly exposed generations through epigenetic inheritance. While some toxicants do not impact the directly exposed generation, the later generations that are transgenerational or ancestrally exposed suffer health impacts. Due to impacts to future generations, exposure becomes an environmental justice concern. The term \"environmental justice\" denotes the application of fair strategies when resolving unjust environmental contamination. Fair treatment means that no group should bear a disproportionate share of negative environmental consequences resulting from industrial, municipal, and commercial operations. This article illustrates how research on directly exposed generations is often prioritized over studies on transgenerational generations. However, research on the latter generations suggests the need to take environmental justice concerns seriously moving forward, as future generations could be unduly shouldering harms, while not enjoying benefits of production.

The worldwide increase in older persons demands technological solutions to combat the shortage of caregiving and to enable aging in place. Smart home health technologies (SHHTs) are promoted and implemented as a possible solution from an economic and practical perspective. However, ethical considerations are equally important and need to be investigated.
We conducted a systematic review according to the PRISMA guidelines to investigate if and how ethical questions are discussed in the field of SHHTs in caregiving for older persons.
156 peer-reviewed articles published in English, German and French were retrieved and analyzed across 10 electronic databases. Using narrative analysis, 7 ethical categories were mapped: privacy, autonomy, responsibility, human vs. artificial interactions, trust, ageism and stigma, and other concerns.
The findings of our systematic review show the (lack of) ethical consideration when it comes to the development and implementation of SHHTs for older persons. Our analysis is useful to promote careful ethical consideration when carrying out technology development, research and deployment to care for older persons.
We registered our systematic review in the PROSPERO network under CRD42021248543.

Most deaths in Pediatric Intensive Care Units involve forgoing life-sustaining treatment. Such deaths required carefully planned end-of-life care built on compassion and focused on palliative care measures. This study aims to assess topics related to the end of life care in Brazilian pediatric intensive care units from the perspective of a multidisciplinary team.
The authors used a tested questionnaire, utilizing Likert-style and open-ended questions. After ethics committee approval, it was sent by email from September to November/2019 to three Pediatric Intensive Care Units in the South and Southeast of Brazil. One unit was exclusively dedicated to oncology patients; the others were mixed units.
From 144 surveys collected (23% response rate) 136 were analyzed, with 35% physicians, 30% nurses, 21% nurse technicians, and 14% physiotherapists responding. Overall, only 12% reported enough end-of-life care training and 40% reported never having had any, albeit this was not associated with the physician\'s confidence in forgoing life-sustaining treatment. Furthermore, 60% of physicians and 46% of other professionals were more comfortable with non-escalation than withdrawing therapies, even if this could prolong suffering. All physicians were uncomfortable with palliative extubation; 15% of all professionals have witnessed it. The oncologic team uniquely felt that \"resistance from the teams of specialists\" was the main barrier to end-of-life care implementation.
Most professionals felt unprepared to forego life-sustaining treatment. Even for terminally ill patients, withholding is preferred over the withdrawal of treatment. Socio-cultural barriers and the lack of adequate training may be contributing to insecurity in the care of terminally ill patients, diverging from practices in other countries.

The Human Cell Atlas (HCA) is striving to build an open community that is inclusive of all researchers adhering to its principles and as open as possible with respect to data access and use. However, open data sharing can pose certain challenges. For instance, being a global initiative, the HCA must contend with a patchwork of local and regional privacy rules. A notable example is the implementation of the European Union General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), which caused some concern in the biomedical and genomic data-sharing community. We examine how the HCA\'s large, international group of researchers is investing tremendous efforts into ensuring appropriate sharing of data. We describe the HCA\'s objectives and governance, how it defines open data sharing, and ethico-legal challenges encountered early in its development; in particular, we describe the challenges prompted by the GDPR. Finally, we broaden the discussion to address tools and strategies that can be used to address ethical data governance.

In this paper, I will examine the Supreme Court of the United States\' (SCOTUS) arguments in the majority decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women\'s Health Organization, and I will show how some of those arguments are flawed. Primarily, I will show that the right to bodily autonomy is a well-established right, both in the courts and in societal practices, and that the right to an abortion should be understood as an example of the right to bodily autonomy or bodily integrity. Second, I will examine the justices\' arguments that viability is not a reasonable place to restrict abortion access, in contrast to both Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, and will offer arguments that defend viability as a valid point to limit abortion access. Third, I will highlight some politicians\' goals to enact a federal ban on abortion, and show how the attempt to pass Personhood Amendments is a pathway for doing so. The upshot of this essay to is show how the SCOTUS decision is flawed, and how granting personhood to \"potential life\" has consequences that extend beyond abortion access.