The Tuskegee syphilis study: A reminder for every researcher

Sir,

It has now been more than 50 years after the “Tuskegee syphilis study of Untreated Syphilis” was made public on July 25, 1972, in the Washington Star by a journalist with information provided by a social worker, Paul Buxton occurred.[1,2] The study which was conducted in Macon county, Alabama, in the United States, is itself a reminder of the ethical issues and unjust related especially to the “399-Alabama-Black-rural-sharecropping-illiterate-men” participants who were syphilis infected.[1] The study objectives were mainly to see the different outcomes of untreated syphilis. Informed consent, which is a necessity in any present-day research, was never obtained from the participants, in fact, the study participants were made to believe that they were getting treatment when lumbar puncture was performed for obtaining cerebrospinal fluid while no treatment was actually provided to them.[1,2] During the study period, penicillin came into existence and was found effective for treating syphilis, but the study participants were denied of the same. This study continued for 40 years until its exposure and subsequent termination occurred in 1972.[1] The fact that this study was conducted under the knowledge and supervision of the Public Health Service, which is the present CDC, and for it to continue for 40 years is something that leaves the scientific community and the public of the present day surprised whenever this study is remembered or talked about. The fact that this study led to 15 publications in highly reputed journals like JAMA, where no researcher questioned the ethical issues related to the study, is also commendable.[1] The fact that this study was conducted by bright minds of that time who later in life were awarded for their contribution to science and even compared to greats like Paul Ehrlich is to be kept in mind that science got the better of their conscience and minds and being humane became secondary.[1]

Hence, a present-day researcher should always keep in mind the bioethics related to conducting any clinical trial, especially in the context where the system has made publication mandatory for job interviews, promotion, and passing degree examinations. Even though we live in the present day where every research has to be approved by an Ethics Committee, it is recommended that anyone involved in research in a country like ours reads documents that are relevant in the Indian context like the ICMR document titled “National Ethical Guidelines For Biomedical and Health Research Involving Human Participants” which is a “must read for every Indian researcher, members of ethics committees and anyone involved in the conduct of biomedical and health research involving human participants.”[3] However, the most important thing is that a researcher should learn to think and put themselves in the shoes of participants and to have the courage to speak and act when something is wrong or seems not right. The wrongs which we, as humans, have made in the past, should be a reminder for the present-day researcher or scientists, that similar events should never occur ever again in the present or future.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.

Funding Statement

Nil.