A rich academic literature exists about issues of informed consent in medical care, and, to a lesser extent, about a variety of issues posed by human experimentation. Most commentators regard patient autonomy as a desirable— though in practice often unattainable—goal, and near unanimity exists about the necessity for even fuller disclosure before experimenting on subjects. Although this Article intentionally side-steps the broader debate about informed consent, it challenges the conventional wisdom that special disclosure rules should apply in the experimental context.Clinical trials have become big business. Estimates suggest that as many as twenty million Americans have enrolled in formal biomedical studies, though, as a measure of the full scope of medical experimentation on humans, that figure may represent only the proverbial tip of the iceberg. Historically, sponsors of clinical trials recruited subjects informally, counting on word of mouth among physicians and also perhaps posting flyers around college campuses.
Allen M. Hornblum, Judith L. Newman and Gregory J. Dober, Against their Will: The Secret History of Medical Experimentation on Children in Cold War America (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2013), pp. x, 266, $ 27.00, hardback, ISBN 978-0-230-34171-5.