Harmonising green informed consent with autonomous clinical decision-making: a reply to Resnik and Pugh.

Resnik and Pugh recently explored the ethical implications of routinely integrating environmental concerns into clinical decision-making. While we share their concern for the holistic well-being of patients, our response offers a different clinical and bioethical stance on green informed consent and patient autonomy. Contrary to the authors' lack of data to support their concerns about provider and patient willingness to engage in climate-related conversations, we provide evidence supporting their sustainability engagement and stress the importance of a proactive, anticipatory approach in healthcare to align with evolving societal values. If climate change is perceived as a politicised issue, though it is not inherently so, healthcare providers are professionally trained to address sensitive subjects and have a duty to inform patients about potential health risks. Recognising the environmental crisis as a health crisis underscores the direct connection between environmental hazards and patients' well-being. Our perspective advocates for integrating individual considerations, societal responsibilities and systemic changes to promote environmentally sustainable healthcare.

Environmental sustainability and the paradox of prevention.

The carbon emissions of global healthcare activities make up 4%-5% of total world emissions, with the majority coming from industrialised countries. The solution to healthcare carbon reduction in these countries, ostensibly, would be preventive healthcare, which is less resource intensive than corrective healthcare in itself and, as a double benefit, reduces carbon by preventing diseases which may require higher healthcare carbon to treat. This leads to a paradox: preventive healthcare is designed to give humans longer, healthier lives. But, by extending life spans, the carbon emissions of a person increase both over a lifetime and in the medical industry overall. At the same time, the need for higher carbon end-of-life care does not disappear, particularly in resource intensive countries. This article will first identify sources of healthcare carbon, focusing on the industrialised world, and explain various efforts towards healthcare carbon reduction, which include preventive healthcare. Second, it will develop the 'paradox of prevention'-that preventive healthcare may save healthcare carbon by proximally reducing the need for medical treatments, but also, paradoxically, result in more healthcare carbon both in an individual's life and in the medical industry. The third section will offer ethical principles for approaching the paradox of prevention. The conclusion will emphasise the need for institutional approaches to healthcare carbon reduction in the industrialised world, which will relieve some of the tensions of healthcare industry decarbonisation and individual healthcare carbon use.

The eco-ethical contribution of Menico Torchio - a forgotten pioneer of European Bioethics.

BACKGROUND: In 1926, Fritz Jahr described bio-ethics (German: bio-ethik) as "the assumption of moral obligations not only towards humans, but towards all forms of life." Jahr summarized his philosophy by declaring, "Respect every living being on principle as an end in itself and treat it, if possible, as such!." Bioethics was thus originally an ethical system concerned with the "problems of interference with other living beings… and generally everything related to the balance of the ecosystem" according to the 1978 Encyclopedia of Bioethics. This definition was predicated on the work of Fritz Jahr, Menico Torchio, and Van Rensselaer Potter. METHODS: In order to proceed with depthful analysis of the origin and major bioethical flare up, we will use critical analysis of existing literature, followed by a study trip to relevant bioethical localities (collecting photo and other documentations regarding Menico Torchio). RESULTS: While Jahr and Potter are typically given intellectual credit for developing the field of bioethics, the eco-ethical contributions of Menico Torchio have been forgotten.This article will first trace the origins of "bioethics" - now commonly bifurcated into "biomedical ethics" and "environmental bioethics." The former was developed by Tom Beauchamp from the Philosophy Department and James Childress of the Religious Studies department at Georgetown University and is based on principlism, with a narrow focus on medical settings. The latter addresses the environmental impact of the medical industry and climate change health hazards. Second, we will present a panorama of Torchio's significant intellectual contribution to bioethics. Menico Torchio's concept of bioethics synthesized work of both Jahr and Potter, advocating "the need to expand our ethical obligations and embrace the most developed groups of animals, not only physically but also psychologically." Third, we will reflect on the lasting legacy of "bioethics" on biomedical and environmental bioethics today. Thematic elements such as interconnectedness of planetary health and human health, dedication to living in harmony with nature, and emphasis on systems and symbiosis remain unchanged from the legacy of Tochio onward. CONCLUSION: Our conclusion will underscore the necessity of understanding the connections between planetary, environmental, and human health.

"Green informed consent" in the classroom, clinic, and consultation room.

The carbon emissions of global health care activities make up 4-5% of total world emissions, placing it on par with the food sector. Carbon emissions are particularly relevant for health care because of climate change health hazards. Doctors and health care professionals must connect their health care delivery with carbon emissions and minimize resource use when possible as a part of their obligation to do no harm. Given that reducing carbon is a global ethical priority, the informed consent process in health care delivery must change. I argue that the expanded role of bioethicists in this climate crisis is to promote and support "green informed consent:" the sharing of climate information with patients, offering options for lower-carbon health care, and accepting the patient's right to decline treatments which are deemed too carbon intensive for their values.

Environmental ethics beyond conferences: A response to the WCB bioethics in Qatar.

Rieke van der Graaf, Karin Jongsma, Martine de Vries, Suzanne van de Vathorst, and Ineke Bolt have done well to voice ethical concerns over the decision of the IAB to host the next WCB in Qatar. Conferences should be more sustainable. Yet, attention to the carbon impact of conferences-and, perhaps, any country that a person might travel to for business or pleasure-are only one small part of environmentally responsible citizenship, especially for those trained in ethics and committed to health. Both bioethics as a discipline and bioethicists as individuals need to interrogate their environmental choices. To this end, some ecological choices are more obvious targets of ethical scrutiny-diet and travel-while others appear sacrosanct, like reproduction and even healthcare use. This underscores the importance of making sustainable and ethical organizational choices, such as where to hold a conference, without absolving environmental accountability in other ethical calculations. Many organizations in academic and clinical medicine need to make drastic alterations in their practices and policies to effectively mitigate carbon. While the burden is not only on bioethics alone, the expectation that it should be remains.

[The moral ideal of planetary health: ethical implications for healthcare]. / Het morele ideaal van planetaire gezondheid.

Planetary health is not only a new field of research and practice; it is also a moral ideal. What are the implications for medicine and health care? In this article, we argue that within this ideal, health of humans, animals and also nature are worthy of protection for their own sake. These values can reinforce each other, but they may also conflict. We formulate a general framework that provides some direction for ethical reflection. Next we discuss implications of the ideal of planetary health for zoonotic disease outbreaks, for environmental sustainability of health care, and for global health and solidarity in the face of climate change. Planetary health demands much from health care, and this will also further exacerbate existing policy dilemmas.

Reimagining research ethics to include environmental sustainability: a principled approach, including a case study of data-driven health research.

In this paper we argue the need to reimagine research ethics frameworks to include notions of environmental sustainability. While there have long been calls for healthcare ethics frameworks and decision-making to include aspects of sustainability, less attention has focused on how research ethics frameworks could address this. To do this, we first describe the traditional approach to research ethics, which often relies on individualised notions of risk. We argue that we need to broaden this notion of individual risk to consider issues associated with environmental sustainability. This is because research is associated with carbon emissions and other environmental impacts, both of which cause climate change health hazards. We introduce how bioethics frameworks have considered notions of environmental sustainability and draw on these to help develop a framework suitable for researchers. We provide a case study of data-driven health research to apply our framework.

Carbon Emissions from Overuse of U.S. Health Care: Medical and Ethical Problems.

The United States health care industry is the second largest in the world, expending an estimated 479 million metric tons (MMT) of carbon dioxide per year, nearly 8 percent of the country's total emissions. The importance of carbon reduction in health care is slowly being accepted. However, efforts to "green" health care are incomplete since they generally focus on buildings and structures. Yet hospital care and clinical service sectors contribute the most carbon dioxide within the U.S. health care industry, with structures/equipment and pharmaceuticals ranking as the third and fourth highest emitters in the industry. Given the magnitude of health care carbon emissions-and the paucity of attention to the carbon of hospital care and clinical services-this essay identifies overuse of health care as a health threat with serious ethical implications, offers a data-driven action plan for carbon reduction in health care, and provides practical suggestions for more sustainable health care delivery in the United States.

Environmentally sustainable development and use of artificial intelligence in health care.

Artificial intelligence (AI) can transform health care by delivering medical services to underserved areas, while also filling gaps in health care provider availability. However, AI may also lead to patient harm due to fatal glitches in robotic surgery, bias in diagnosis, or dangerous recommendations. Despite concerns ethicists have identified in the use of AI in health care, the most significant consideration ought not be vulnerabilities in the software, but the environmental impact of AI. Health care emits a significant amount of carbon in many countries. As AI becomes an essential part of health care, ethical reflection must include the potential to negatively impact the environment. As such, this article will first overview the carbon emissions in health care. It will, second, offer five reasons why carbon calculations are insufficient to address sustainability in health care. Third, the article will derive normative concepts from the goals of medicine, the principles of biomedical ethics, and green bioethics-the very locus in which AI in health care sits-to propose health, justice, and resource conservation as criteria for sustainable AI in health care. In the fourth and final part of the article, examples of sustainable and unsustainable development and use of AI in health care will be evaluated through the three-fold lens of health, justice, and resource conservation. With various ethical approaches to AI in health care, the imperative for environmental sustainability must be underscored, lest carbon emissions continue to increase, harming people and planet alike.

Environmental sustainability and the carbon emissions of pharmaceuticals.

The US healthcare industry emits an estimated 479 million tonnes of carbon dioxide each year; nearly 8% of the country's total emissions. When assessed by sector, hospital care, clinical services, medical structures, and pharmaceuticals are the top emitters. For 15 years, research has been dedicated to the medical structures and equipment that contribute to carbon emissions. More recently, hospital care and clinical services have been examined. However, the carbon of pharmaceuticals is understudied. This article will focus on the carbon emissions of pharmaceuticals since they are consistently calculated to be among the top contributors to healthcare carbon and assess the factors that contribute to pharmaceutical carbon emissions. Specifically, overprescription, pharmaceutical waste, antibiotic resistance, routine prescriptions, non-adherence, drug dependency, lifestyle prescriptions, and drugs given due to a lack of preventive healthcare will be identified. Prescribing practices have environmental ramifications. Carbon reduction, when focused on pharmaceuticals, can lead to cleaner, more sustainable healthcare.

Individual emergency-preparedness efforts: A social justice perspective.

BACKGROUND: Since 2010, the United States has experienced 228 disasters, affecting over 86 million people. Because of population shifts, the growing number of people living with chronic conditions or disabilities, and the growing number of older citizens living independently, access and service gaps often exist for those without money or other transferable resources. There is a lack of evidence regarding individual community members' capacity to prepare for emergencies. RESEARCH OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to highlight participant experiences in becoming better prepared for emergencies and provide insight from a social justice perspective. RESEARCH DESIGN: This is a descriptive qualitative study, staying very close to the data as an end product rather than a beginning for interpretation. PARTICIPANTS AND RESEARCH CONTEXT: A total of 13 low-income, uninsured, or under-insured attendees at a medical outreach clinic were interviewed. ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS: Institutional Review Board approval was obtained from the University of Texas at Tyler. FINDINGS: Four themes emerged from the interview data: (a) evaluation of the emergency-preparedness education, (b) making emergency plans, (c) challenges in preparing for emergencies, and (d) facilitators of emergency preparedness. DISCUSSION: Identifying the potential challenges to individual emergency preparedness among vulnerable populations is the first step in overcoming them. The capacity to comply with such measures, especially the ability of those with limited incomes and other vulnerable populations, must be considered. CONCLUSION: Synchronized, well-ordered assistance will close gaps in recovery and enhance efficiency in pre- and post-event aid. Theoretically, doing so will promote engaged and resilient members of society who are better able to withstand adverse events. The importance of the relationship between individual preparedness levels and the resiliency of nations supports the social justice imperative to address the needs of vulnerable populations in the mitigation and planning phase of the emergency management cycle.

Can United States Healthcare Become Environmentally Sustainable? Towards Green Healthcare Reform.

In 2014, the United States health care industry produced an estimated 480 million metric tons of carbon dioxide (CO2); nearly 8% of the country's total emissions. The importance of sustainability in health care - as a business reliant on fossil fuels for transportation, energy, and operational functioning - is slowly being recognized. These efforts to green health care are incomplete, since they only focus on health care structures. The therapeutic relationship is the essence of health care - not the buildings that contain the practice. As such, this article will first postulate reasons for a lack of environmental sustainability in US health care. Second, the article will focus on current green health care initiatives in the United States in which patients and physicians participate. Third, the rationale for participation in green initiatives will be explained. Fourth, the article will propose that, based on the environmental values of patients and physicians, health care insurance plans and health care insurance companies can be targeted for green health care reform, thereby closing the loop of sustainable health care delivery.

Not Sick: Liberal, Trans, and Crip Feminist Critiques of Medicalization.

Medicalization occurs when an aspect of embodied humanity is scrutinized by the medical industry, claimed as pathological, and subsumed under medical intervention. Numerous critiques of medicalization appear in academic literature, often put forth by bioethicists who use a variety of "lenses" to make their case. Feminist critiques of medicalization raise the concerns of the politically disenfranchised, thus seeking to protect women-particularly natal sex women-from medical exploitation. This article will focus on three feminist critiques of medicalization, which offer an alternative narrative of sickness and health. I will first briefly describe the philosophical origins of medicalization. Then, I will present three feminist critiques of medicalization. Liberal feminism, trans feminism, and crip feminism tend to regard Western medicine with a hermeneutics of suspicion and draw out potential harms of medicalization of reproductive sexuality, gender, and disability, respectively. While neither these branches of feminism-nor their critiques-are homogenous, they provide much-needed commentaries on phallocentric medicine. I will conclude the paper by arguing for the continual need for feminist critiques of medicalization, using uterus transplantation as a relevant case study.

Lessons from Queer Bioethics: A Response to Timothy F. Murphy.

'Bioethics still has important work to do in helping to secure status equality for LGBT people' writes Timothy F. Murphy in a recent Bioethics editorial. The focus of his piece, however, is much narrower than human rights, medical care for LGBT people, or ending the HIV/AIDS pandemic. Rather, he is primarily concerned with sexuality and gender identity, and the medical intersections thereof (i.e. DSM diagnosis; access to SrS or ARTs). It is the objective of this response to provide an alternate account of bioethics from a Queer perspective. I will situate Queer bioethics within Queer studies, and offer three 'lessons' that bioethics can derive from this perspective. These are not definitive rules for Queer bioethics, since it is a field which fundamentally opposes categorizations, favoring pastiche over principles. These lessons are exploratory examples, which both complement and contradict LGBT bioethics. My latter two lessons - on environmental bioethics and disability - overlap with some of Murphy's concerns, as well as other conceptions of LGBT bioethics. However, the first lesson takes an antithetical stance to Murphy's primary focus by resisting all forms of heteroconformity and disavowing reproduction as consonant with Queer objectives and theory. The first lesson, which doubles as a primer in Queer theory, does heavy philosophical lifting for the remainder of the essay. This response to Timothy F. Murphy, whose work is certainly a legacy in bioethics, reveals the multiplicity of discourses in LGBT/Queer studies, many of which are advantageous - even essential - to other disciplines like bioethics.

What would an environmentally sustainable reproductive technology industry look like?

Through the use of assisted reproductive technologies (ARTs), multiple children are born adding to worldwide carbon emissions. Evaluating the ethics of offering reproductive services against its overall harm to the environment makes unregulated ARTs unjustified, yet the ART business can move towards sustainability as a part of the larger green bioethics movement. By integrating ecological ethos into the ART industry, climate change can be mitigated and the conversation about consumption can become a broader public discourse. Although the impact of naturally made children on the environment is undeniable, I will focus on the ART industry as an anthropogenic source of carbon emissions which lead to climate change. The ART industry is an often overlooked source of environmental degradation and decidedly different from natural reproduction as fertility centres provide a service for a fee and therefore can be subject to economic, policy and bioethical scrutiny. In this article, I will provide a brief background on the current state of human-driven climate change before suggesting two conservationist strategies that can be employed in the ART business. First, endorsing a carbon capping programme that limits the carbon emissions of ART businesses will be proposed. Second, I will recommend that policymakers eliminate funded ARTs for those who are not biologically infertile. I will conclude the article by urging policymakers and all those concerned with climate change to consider the effects of the reproductive technologies industry in light of climate change and move towards sustainability.