AIR 42 · CSE 2017 · GS4 · 58 pages

Sudhir Kumar: GS4 answer copy

19 answers by Sudhir Kumar, as written in the test. Each question opens a page with how other toppers answered it.

The questions

  1. Q1220 marks
  2. Q14Dr. A.K. Singh, a professor of medicine, is a prominent cardiologist. His personal financial investments include significant stock holdings in three publicly traded biotechnology firms. He is approached by one of these firms to be a lead investigator in a therapeutic trial of a novel agent for preventing tissue damage from myocardial infarction (MI). This will be a randomized double-blinded, placebo-controlled clinical trial (neither patient nor physician will know whether the drug under investigation or a placebo is being used in a given patient). Dr. Singh is quite familiar with the preliminary animal and cell biology work in the area and believes that there is an excellent chance that this new drug will result in a significant improvement in survival and reduce damage to the heart muscle. He even thinks this novel agent may reduce the risk of heart failure and irregular beats. Dr. Singh's group is one of the few cardiology groups fully prepared to carry out this investigation, which is why he was contacted. He cares for a large number of patients with MI and believes that he could enroll numerous patients efficiently. The drug will only be available to his patients if his group participates in the trial. The company is offering Rs. 25 lakh for each patient enrolled. As a lead investigator, he will become much better known and will likely experience an increase in referrals if the trial succeeds. 1. Is Dr. Singh's participation in this study appropriate? Justify your position. 2. Does Dr. Singh have a conflict of interest? If so, what is the nature of the conflict? How could it be mitigated. 3. How would the nature of the conflict of interest be different had he not already owned stock, but instead had been offered stock as a form of compensation for conducting the study?20 marks

The answers

Question 1(a) · 10 marks · 228 words written

Celebrities are paid huge amounts by companies for endorsing products that at times turn out to be harmful for the consumers. Examine the ethical dimensions involved in such instances.

Opening

Celebrity product endorsements and issues arising out of it came under much scanner with ban of maggi.

The ethical issues involved are -

Body · points

i) Accountability : Celebrities build their palaces out of money of customers, so they must pay too for their health if product turns out faulty.

ii) Public health impact : Fans follow their stars in using product they endorse. Celebrity may not be using it himself/herself. It may lead to disaster like happened in case of housing apartments in 2000, which turned out to be fraud.

iii) Separation of personal and public duties Stars say that they dont have any responsibility and accountability must lie with producers and food regulator. True, but any information or advertisement in public domain should only come out after inquiry by celebrity.

Like celebrities endorsing wine bottles may lead to negative impact due to overconsumption. Advertisements must be driven by taking care of public welfare.

There is nothing called unaccountability in public domain. However, it must only be a civil penalty and not criminal.

iv) Honesty, probity: A star must not be swayed by attractive offer because they must remember that they are being offered that advertisement only because of their image made by public fans and they must honestly probe the matter.

Close · a way forward

Thus advertising standards council of India must issue general guidelines along with FSSAI in welfare of public.