Feeding and Bleeding: The Institutional Banalization of Risk to Healthy Volunteers in Phase I Pharmaceutical Clinical Trials.

Jill A Fisher
Author Information
  1. Jill A Fisher: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.

Abstract

Phase I clinical trials are the first stage of testing new pharmaceuticals in humans. The majority of these studies are conducted under controlled, inpatient conditions using healthy volunteers who are paid for their participation. This article draws on an ethnographic study of six phase I clinics in the United States, including 268 semistructured interviews with research staff and healthy volunteers. In it, I argue that an institutional banalization of risk structures the perceptions of research staff and healthy volunteers participating in the studies. For research staff, there are three mechanisms by which risk becomes banal: a perceived homogeneity of studies, Fordist work regimes, and data-centric discourse. For healthy volunteers, repeat study participation contributes to the institutional banalization of risk both through the process of desensitization to risk and the formation of trust in the clinics. I argue that the institutional banalization of risk also renders invisible ethical concerns about exploitation of underprivileged groups in pharmaceutical research.

Keywords

References

  1. J Clin Pharmacol. 2000 Dec;40(12 Pt 2):1399-418 [PMID: 11185661]
  2. J Law Med Ethics. 2004 Summer;32(2):279-92, 191 [PMID: 15301193]
  3. J Contemp Ethnogr. 2015 Dec;44(6):709-736 [PMID: 26688613]
  4. Soc Stud Sci. 2014 Feb;44(1):59-81 [PMID: 28078974]
  5. Am J Bioeth. 2001 Spring;1(2):51-3 [PMID: 11951892]
  6. Soc Sci Med. 2006 Feb;62(4):998-1008 [PMID: 16085345]
  7. Med Soc (Berkeley). 1996;:1-466 [PMID: 11619509]
  8. Sci Cult (Lond). 2001 Jun;10(2):195-223 [PMID: 15971362]
  9. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2006 Oct;62(4):502-3 [PMID: 16817849]
  10. JAMA. 2005 Feb 2;293(5):609-12 [PMID: 15687316]
  11. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2012 Jun;91(6):965-8 [PMID: 22609908]
  12. Perspect Biol Med. 1984 Spring;27(3):336-60 [PMID: 6728631]
  13. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2003 Dec;74(6):511-2 [PMID: 14663452]
  14. Soc Sci Med. 2008 Jun;66(12):2495-505 [PMID: 18353515]
  15. Soc Sci Med. 2002 Aug;55(3):497-507 [PMID: 12144155]
  16. N Engl J Med. 2006 May 4;354(18):1869-71 [PMID: 16672696]
  17. IRB. 2012 Jan-Feb;34(1):1-8 [PMID: 22338401]
  18. Kennedy Inst Ethics J. 2013 Dec;23(4):355-79 [PMID: 24552076]
  19. J Med Ethics. 2010 Jan;36(1):34-6 [PMID: 20026691]
  20. Am J Public Health. 2011 Dec;101(12):2217-22 [PMID: 22021285]
  21. Gend Med. 2010 Aug;7(4):357-70 [PMID: 20869636]

Grants

  1. R21 CA131880/NCI NIH HHS

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0riskhealthyvolunteersresearchstudiesstaffinstitutionalbanalizationPhaseclinicaltrialspharmaceuticalsparticipationstudyphaseclinicsarguefirststagetestingnewhumansmajorityconductedcontrolledinpatientconditionsusingpaidarticledrawsethnographicsixUnitedStatesincluding268semistructuredinterviewsstructuresperceptionsparticipatingthreemechanismsbecomesbanal:perceivedhomogeneityFordistworkregimesdata-centricdiscourserepeatcontributesprocessdesensitizationformationtrustalsorendersinvisibleethicalconcernsexploitationunderprivilegedgroupspharmaceuticalFeedingBleeding:InstitutionalBanalizationRiskHealthyVolunteersPharmaceuticalClinicalTrials

Similar Articles

Cited By