Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- christine_grady [2022/02/15 19:39]
pamela
+++ christine_grady [2022/08/05 17:14] (current)
pamela [COVID Policy PR Campaigns]
@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-===== Christine Grady, MSN, PhD =====
+===== Christine Grady =====
 NIH bio - Chief, Bioethics & Head, Section on Human Subjects Research  {{ ::christine_grady_fauci_wife.png?200|}}
@@ Line 13: / Line 13: @@
 She has participated in numerous intergovernmental task forces and is the recipient of several awards, including the [[NIH CEO Award]] in 2017 , and the [[NIH Director's Award]] in 2015 and 2017. ((https://web.archive.org/web/20190409054241/https://clinicalcenter.nih.gov/meet-our-doctors/cgrady.html))
+March 2, 2012 - International voice in human subjects protections named NIH Clinical Center bioethics chief
+Christine Grady, Ph.D., was recently named chief of the Department of Bioethics of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Clinical Center. Grady has served as deputy director of the department since 1996 and served as acting chief since September 2011.
+Grady is currently a member of President Obama's Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues and is a senior research fellow at the Kennedy Institute of Ethics. She is a fellow of both the American Academy of Nursing and the Hastings Center. Grady has served as a consultant to international bodies such as UNAIDS (1996 and 1998) and the Pan American Health Organization (1999) and spent two years in Brazil with Project Hope. ((https://web.archive.org/web/20210321194021/https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/international-voice-human-subjects-protections-named-nih-clinical-center-bioethics-chief))
 === Personal Life ===
@@ Line 43: / Line 49: @@
 However, despite the NIH developing and giving the ethical green light to coronavirus injections – particularly [[Moderna]]’s, which was made with help by NIAID scientists – the number of deaths and adverse reactions continue to grow each week following administration of the injection. ((https://web.archive.org/web/20210909174628/https://rightsfreedoms.wordpress.com/2021/09/09/conflict-of-interest-faucis-wife-runs-bioethics-department-at-nih/))
+==== Ethical Arguments for Covert Public Drugging ====
+Why does the federal government need a secret plan? Because half of the American citizens refuse to take vaccines.According to [[:Francis Collins]], M.D. He heads the National Institute of Health (NIH). ((https://web.archive.org/web/20210509174518/https://www.cnn.com/world/live-news/coronavirus-pandemic-10-23-20-intl/h_ba1397022dc57efb7b26a221ca07bfef))
+The solution? A secret plan to drug public drinking water with psych drugs. The federal government can do that? If it is “for the public good.” Who determines the public good? Christine Grady, RN, Ph.D.? She is Dr. Anthony Fauci’s wife. Or their boss? Dr. [[:Francis Collins]], head of the [[:National Institutes of Health]] (NIH).((https://web.archive.org/web/20210323021102/https://brassballs.blog/home/bioethics-christine-grady-fauci-parker-crutchfield-francis-collins-nih-moral-bioenhancement-psych-drugs-public-drinking-water-human-subjects-research-compulsory-wmich-apnews-cnn-wife-husband))
+=== Compulsory moral bioenhancement should be covert ===
+Parker Crutchfield  January 2019
+PMID: 30157295 DOI: 10.1111/bioe.12496 ))
+Abstract -
+Some theorists argue that moral bioenhancement ought to be compulsory. I take this argument one step further, arguing that if moral bioenhancement ought to be compulsory, then its administration ought to be covert rather than overt. This is to say that it is morally preferable for compulsory moral bioenhancement to be administered without the recipients knowing that they are receiving the enhancement. My argument for this is that if moral bioenhancement ought to be compulsory, then its administration is a matter of public health, and for this reason should be governed by public health ethics.
+I argue that the covert administration of a compulsory moral bioenhancement program better conforms to public health ethics than does an overt compulsory program. In particular, a covert compulsory program promotes values such as liberty, utility, equality, and autonomy better than an overt program does. Thus, a covert compulsory moral bioenhancement program is morally preferable to an overt moral bioenhancement program.((https://web.archive.org/web/20210111074543/https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30157295/))
+===How Fauci and Grady Degraded the Standards of Ethical Requirements for Clinical Research in the US Compared to the Rest of the World ((https://web.archive.org/web/20220728004837/https://popularrationalism.substack.com/p/how-fauci-and-grady-lowered-the-standards)) ===
+The Virtuous Investigator: The Way Forward
+The virtuous investigator who is motivated to take ethical responsibilities seriously is an essential safeguard for the protection of human research participants and an important complement to the system of oversight protections. However, since the current human subjects protection system does not promote virtue or ethical resourcefulness by investigators, attention to enhancing a culture of professional responsibility might serve to forge a synergy between the protections afforded by the current oversight system and those provided by the virtuous investigator.
+Unfortunately, the current human subjects protections system has had the ironic effect of diminishing explicit reliance on the virtuous investigator and in some cases alienating investigators. Strategies that synergize the regulatory protections with a more rigorous culture of responsibility among investigators could help restore a healthier balance.((https://web.archive.org/web/20180603122920/https://muse.jhu.edu/article/627988))
 ==== COVID Policy PR Campaigns ====
@@ Line 87: / Line 114: @@
 ((https://web.archive.org/web/20210913211044/https://www.elle.com/culture/career-politics/a32715031/fauci-christine-grady-nih-covid/))
+=== CBS News Interview Fauci & Grady ===
+  Q&A - Dr. Fauci Says, “With All Due Modesty, I Think I’m Pretty Effective.”
+LAS VEGAS (FOX5) -- Dr. Anthony Fauci and his wife, Dr. Christine Grady, spoke with CBS Evening News anchor Norah O’Donnell about a potential COVID-19 vaccine, working with the White House, and what life is like at home.(key quotes from video)
+Fauci -  I don’t like to phrase it in the context of what we’ve done wrong, as opposed to let’s take a look at what happened and maybe we can have lessons learned. We never got it down to baseline for a number of reasons. **Perhaps it was the lack of compliance of people in the country or the kinds of restrictions that we felt would be appropriate.** If you look at the European curve, they came down essentially to baseline, which is very different than us. So, [they] stomped out the infection pretty well. When they started to open up again, there wasn’t that much infection around. If you look at the European countries, they shut down about 90 to 95 percent of the country. Whereas when we shut down, the calculation is that we shut down about 50 percent.
+I don’t want to see [the country] going back down to complete lockdown. I think that it will be very difficult for the States to accept that. **As we try to proceed, we need to really take seriously the issue of wearing masks all the time and not congregating in bars. I think we can stop that by just closing them, because they are certainly an important mechanism of this spread. Keep distances, wash hands, avoid crowds, wear a mask …** I think if we diligently do those things, we can turn this around.
+It was very good news that the **New England Journal of Medicine reported that the Phase 1 trial substantial titers of neutralizing antibodies were induced, which is the gold standard for prediction of protection**. So that was a very good news story for the day. We’re going to start the Phase 3 trial in the third or fourth week of July. That is going to take place over the rest of the summer and into the fall. If all goes well and there aren’t any unanticipated bumps in the road, hopefully, we should know whether the vaccine is safe and effective by the end of this calendar year, or the beginning of 2021.
+By the beginning of the year **we should have the first tens of millions and then hundreds of millions of doses. That being the case, I would think we could vaccinate a substantial portion of the population as we get into 2021** — if the vaccine is safe and effective.
+Grady -
+Well, I would say that masks shouldn’t be divisive. It’s a relatively easy way to protect one’s self and others. **And so for public health reasons, I think everybody should do it. From an ethical perspective there is always this tension between what you ask people to do that feels like a restriction of their liberty and what is required for public health.** And in this case, it seems like a slam dunk. It’s not restricting liberty much, and it’s very helpful for public health.
+Bioethics is a wonderful complement to science because all scientific endeavors have interesting bioethical issues. You have to understand the science in order to understand the ethical issues, and then you think about them in a constructive and useful way ((https://web.archive.org/web/20210105114231/https://www.fox5vegas.com/coronavirus/q-a-dr-fauci-wife-dr-christine-grady-discuss-covid-19-vaccine-white-house-and/article_0a2a1f00-c77b-11ea-97cd-13eb3aaa7b82.html))
+==== Mrs Fauci on the Ethics of Encouraging Employees to get Vaccinated ====
+August 5, 2022 Naked Emperor Substack
+Should employers encourage their employees to get the COVID-19 vaccination? Of course not, they pay their employees to do a job, not lecture them on their life choices. However, some people think employers should be encouraging vaccination. If so, is it ethical?
+To me the answer is no it is not, but a paper from March of this year looked at this issue. Whilst this is four months or so old, it shows the mindset of the authors which I very much doubt has changed. Although the paper is a few months old, we basically had the same information on transmission, infection, hospitalisation and death as we do now.
+Very often, the first author on a scientific paper makes the most contributions to the research work whilst the last author is the person responsible for the whole project. In this paper, published in the Journal of Public Health Policy, Christine Grady is the last author, meaning she was probably in charge of putting it together.
+Who is Christine Grady? Christine is a bioethicist who is currently the head of the Department of Bioethics at the National Institutes of Health Clinical Center in the US. (the paper is also funded by the Intramural Research Program of the National Human Genome Research Institute). Does she have any conflicts of interest? A quick scan to the bottom of the paper tells us she doesn’t. ((https://nakedemperor.substack.com/p/mrs-fauci-on-the-ethics-of-encouraging))