3 ms·

Its not just about the vaccination. If the end product is developed unethically, what avenues do you have to protest against those methods? Choosing not to bu

Its not just about the vaccination. If the end product is developed unethically, what avenues do you have to protest against those methods? Choosing not to buy or support the product is the most fundamental economic freedom we've got. Here's an example that used to be farther removed from today's social touchstones: Premarin. Premarin is manufactured by keeping mares continuously pregnant in stalls for the continuous collection of their urine. Should you be free to protest those methods by avoiding the product? Should a pharmacist be free to avoid stocking those products entirely if it conflicts with their ethics? Before she passed away, my grandma boycotted premarin for those reasons. That was decades ago, before transitioning became more common. Now it's more of a hot button topic, since premarin is one of the commonly prescribed drugs for transitioning women in addition to post-menopausal women. Should a pharmacist still be allowed to avoid stocking those products?

maxerickson 6y ago
They always have the option of not working in the field. Depending on how licensing is done, it may not be unreasonable to expect people to make the decision about whether they want to work in a profession with state requirements for service before they enter the profession. Of course it's messier if the requirements change after they have invested the time to become licensed, but it isn't that different, they shouldn't enter the regulated profession if they want autonomy.
- brandmeyer 6y ago
  Closely related: Should an engineer be obligated to work on weapons projects? How about weaponized machine inference? Individual practitioners within their field should have some level of autonomy, especially when it comes to ethics. I'm not willing to yank that away from someone just because their ethics disagree with mine. Same thing with consumers. Some of the reasons for avoiding GMO foods are absolutely bonkers in my opinion, but I still believe in the right of consumers to make their own choices. How would the pharma landscape change if prescription drugs were obligated to carry a label that they were developed and tested with human fetal tissue or cell cultures?
  - maxerickson 6y ago
    Product safety requirements are imposed on engineers. If they don't like them, the option is to not offer products. (this examines the obligations and loss of autonomy more than the ethical disagreement, but there's literally no remedy for someone that believes antilock brakes are unethical, we'd tell them to pound sand. The analogy would be better if that person existed, but I think it still works okay.)

maxerickson 6y ago

They always have the option of not working in the field. Depending on how licensing is done, it may not be unreasonable to expect people to make the decision about whether they want to work in a profession with state requirements for service before they enter the profession. Of course it's messier if the requirements change after they have invested the time to become licensed, but it isn't that different, they shouldn't enter the regulated profession if they want autonomy.

brandmeyer 6y ago
Closely related: Should an engineer be obligated to work on weapons projects? How about weaponized machine inference? Individual practitioners within their field should have some level of autonomy, especially when it comes to ethics. I'm not willing to yank that away from someone just because their ethics disagree with mine. Same thing with consumers. Some of the reasons for avoiding GMO foods are absolutely bonkers in my opinion, but I still believe in the right of consumers to make their own choices. How would the pharma landscape change if prescription drugs were obligated to carry a label that they were developed and tested with human fetal tissue or cell cultures?
- maxerickson 6y ago
  Product safety requirements are imposed on engineers. If they don't like them, the option is to not offer products. (this examines the obligations and loss of autonomy more than the ethical disagreement, but there's literally no remedy for someone that believes antilock brakes are unethical, we'd tell them to pound sand. The analogy would be better if that person existed, but I think it still works okay.)