<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Welcome to blog.Bioethics.gov</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.bioethics.gov/2010/11/15/welcome-to-blog-bioethics-gov-2/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.bioethics.gov/2010/11/15/welcome-to-blog-bioethics-gov-2/</link>
	<description>The blog of the Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 May 2013 10:36:58 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>By: Nancy Mich</title>
		<link>http://blog.bioethics.gov/2010/11/15/welcome-to-blog-bioethics-gov-2/#comment-2</link>
		<dc:creator>Nancy Mich</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Nov 2010 19:54:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.bioethics.gov.s92146.gridserver.com/?p=7#comment-2</guid>
		<description>Human Subjects Protections need urgent attention. The recommendations from the ACHR stating that Informed Consent should always be required, even when the research is &quot;classified&quot; have never been implemented, signed off on or adopted. This loophole is unacceptable. The protections therefore are not reliable, as national srecurity related science includes synthetic biology, cognitive neuroscience, brain-computer interface, and many other areas that are unprecedented in their power. 
The commission has not addressed the loophole, the &quot;waiver&quot; of Informed Consent in Natioanl Security related research. 
Without requiring Informed Consent, many of the other protections discussed, are not only meaningless, but misleading in that there is no mention of this hole in Human Protections regulations.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Human Subjects Protections need urgent attention. The recommendations from the ACHR stating that Informed Consent should always be required, even when the research is &#8220;classified&#8221; have never been implemented, signed off on or adopted. This loophole is unacceptable. The protections therefore are not reliable, as national srecurity related science includes synthetic biology, cognitive neuroscience, brain-computer interface, and many other areas that are unprecedented in their power.<br />
The commission has not addressed the loophole, the &#8220;waiver&#8221; of Informed Consent in Natioanl Security related research.<br />
Without requiring Informed Consent, many of the other protections discussed, are not only meaningless, but misleading in that there is no mention of this hole in Human Protections regulations.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
