Central Idea

• A recent paper from August 2023 discusses the ethical and financial aspects of Controlled Human Infection Studies (CHIS), where participants are deliberately infected with pathogens.
• The paper argues that $20,000 for a six-month hepatitis C virus challenge study in the U.S. is reasonable, based on participant experiences and responses from potential participants.

Ethical Considerations in CHIS

• Contentious Issues: One major ethical concern in CHIS is the potential for disproportionate payment, which could be seen as an inducement for participation.
• ICMR’s Bioethics Unit Stance: Emphasizes altruism in CHIS participation, suggesting compensation should cover lost wages, incidental expenses, time, and effort.

Views on Altruism and Compensation

• Jake D Eberts’ Perspective: Disagrees with the ICMR’s emphasis on altruism, arguing that monetary motivation, if accompanied by informed consent and risk understanding, isn’t inherently negative.
• Compensation in Past Studies: Eberts received $7,350 for a Shigella study and less than $5,000 for a Zika study. He advocates for higher compensation in CHIS in the U.S.

Compensation Models and Ethical Frameworks

• Dr. Anna Durbin and Dr. Wilbur H. Chen’s Approaches: Compensation based on time, specimen collection, and regional study pay standards. Dr. Chen uses a Wage-Payment model, aligning compensation with unskilled labor wages in somewhat risky jobs.
• Compensation Calculation: For the Shigella study, compensation totaled $7,350, based on various factors like visit duration, risk level, and activities completed.

Differing Opinions on CHIS Compensation

• Paul Zimmer-Harwood’s Experience: Participated in malaria and COVID-19 CHIS, with compensation based on study duration, visits, and inconvenience, not risk.
• COVID-19 CHIS Concerns: Dr. Chen questions the rationale for COVID-19 CHIS, citing the absence of effective therapies and the risk of Long COVID.

Participant Perspectives and Decisions

• Paul’s Decision-Making: Chose to participate in the COVID-19 CHIS due to low perceived risk, previous infection, and vaccination status. Compensation was higher but proportional to study demands.
• Risk Assessment: Paul viewed the risks as acceptable compared to the potential scientific contributions, emphasizing that his decision was informed and measured.

Conclusion

• Complex Ethical Landscape: CHIS presents a nuanced ethical landscape where compensation, risk, and participant motivation must be carefully balanced.
• Importance of Informed Consent: Ensuring participants are fully informed and understand the risks is crucial in maintaining ethical standards in CHIS.

Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

Attend Now