Alan Goldberg, PhD

Dr. Goldberg actively serves/d on the International Animal Welfare Advisory Boards of Shell, and Procter & Gamble, consults with CeeTox (an in vitro toxicology CRO) and Epithelix. In the non-profit area, he is a trustee of the Humane Society University, a member of the Advisory Board of Faculty for the Department of Institutional Review Ethics and Administration in Nicholas Cardinal Cheong Graduate School for Life, The Catholic University of Korea, (South Korea), a member of the Alexandra Foundation (Monaco), a member of the Board of Directors of the Institute for Scientific Communication (ISC); and is on the Toxicology Panel of EFSA (European Food Safety Authority in Parma, Italy).

Starting in 2007, Dr. Goldberg served as a Pew Commissioner on the study of the Impact of Industrial (US) Farm Animal Production, on issues of public health, environment, animal welfare and social justice. While on the commission, Dr. Goldberg studied with the Talmudic Scholar Rabbi Avram Reisner to learn the Jewish laws dealing with food animal production. At the request of the Committee on Jewish Law of the United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism Dr. Goldberg shared his understandings of farm animal welfare. Dr. Goldberg also chairs the management board of Orange House Partnership, a Belgium NGO dedicated to provide training on food safety to the developing world.

Currently, Dr Goldberg is working on define an ethical framework for feeding the world at an anticipated population of 9+ billion people.

Vaccine Guidance Gains Global Attention

Health and Bioethics Experts: “The treatment of pregnant women in vaccine research
and deployment is unacceptable. Business as usual simply cannot continue.”

New Report Lays out Recommendations for Policymakers, Researchers, and Global Health Organizations on Including Pregnant Women in Epidemic Vaccine Development and Deployment

Even as health care responders valiantly battle the ongoing Ebola outbreak in the Democratic Republic of Congo, one highly vulnerable group is being denied a potentially life-saving vaccine: pregnant and lactating women. This and other recent epidemics of Zika, Lassa Fever, and Hepatitis E have shown how infectious disease outbreaks can severely – and at times uniquely – affect the health of pregnant women and their offspring. Despite a significantly higher risk of serious disease and death, vaccines against these devastating diseases are rarely developed and approved for pregnant women.

Changing institutional and government practices so that we have vaccines to offer pregnant women in an epidemic is one of 22 long overdue recommendations contained in the new report Pregnant Woman & Vaccines Against Emerging Epidemic Threats: Ethics Guidance for Preparedness, Research and Response, issued in December 2018 by the Pregnancy Research Ethics for Vaccines, Epidemics, and New Technologies (PREVENT) Working Group – a multidisciplinary, international team of 17 experts specializing in bioethics, maternal immunization, maternal-fetal medicine, obstetrics, pediatrics, philosophy, public health, and vaccine research and policy. The report, aiming to ensure that pregnant women are no longer excluded from receiving vaccines against emerging infectious diseases, has received widespread media attention, including:

“The self-perpetuating cycle of excluding pregnant women from research and from the benefits of vaccination must end,” said Carleigh Krubiner, a lead author of the report jointly appointed at the Johns Hopkins Berman Institute of Bioethics and the Center for Global Development. “With global efforts now underway to develop a range of vaccines against devastating epidemic threats, we have to make sure pregnant women are on the agenda, so they will never again be left unprotected in the face of future outbreaks.”

The report lays out concrete steps for equitably addressing the needs of pregnant women in public health preparedness, vaccine research and development, and the deployment of vaccines during epidemics. Its recommendations include:

  • During an epidemic, the default should be to offer vaccines to pregnant women—not the reverse.
  • Vaccines that can be safely given to pregnant women need to be developed. For these vaccines, evaluation in pregnancy needs to occur as early in the clinical development process as possible.
  • During an epidemic, decisions about whether pregnant women will be offered vaccines should consider not only any potential risks of the vaccine but also, and importantly, the risks pregnant women and their babies face if vaccine is denied.
  • All decisions about inclusion or exclusion of pregnant women should be informed by those with the relevant expertise in maternal and neonatal health as well as in vaccinology and virology.
  • The perspectives of pregnant women themselves should inform vaccine research and deployment decisions that may mean life or death for them and/or their babies.

The full recommendations are available at http://vax.pregnancyethics.org/prevent-guidance.

“The way we have treated pregnant women in vaccine research and deployment is utterly unacceptable. Business as usual cannot be permitted to continue,” said Ruth R. Faden, a lead author of the report and founding director of the Johns Hopkins Berman Institute of Bioethics. “Ensuring that pregnant women affected by outbreaks have safe and effective vaccines is not only a matter of justice and health equity, it’s also critical to the public health response.”

That pregnant women affected by the ongoing Ebola crisis in the Democratic Republic of the Congo are not being offered vaccine demonstrates how urgent and serious the consequences are of the status quo exclusions of pregnant women from vaccine research and delivery. In recent UNICEF interviews, pregnant women “clearly articulated that they wanted to choose whether to be vaccinated or not.”  As one woman said, ‘now there is no option, you just send us to death.’”

“As we continue to develop new vaccines against pathogens with serious and often lethal consequences in pregnancy, pregnant women must be on the agenda every step of the way,” said Ruth A. Karron, a lead author of the report and director of the Center for Immunization Research and the Johns Hopkins Vaccine Initiative at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. “We simply can’t continue to fail pregnant women as we develop new vaccines against emerging threats.  We need to generate an evidence base for safe and effective use of these vaccines during pregnancy.”

To read the full report visit vax.pregnancyethics.org/prevent-guidance. In conjunction with the report release, PREVENT has also released a video that discusses the risks of the status quo, and describes why urgent action is needed. You can watch the video at vax.pregnancyethics.org.

PREVENT is a grant-funded project led by faculty at Johns Hopkins University alongside co-investigators at Georgetown University and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, with external contributions from Working Group Members. The PREVENT Project is funded by the Wellcome Trust (203160/Z/16/Z).

 

2018-19 Seminar Series

Leading bioethics scholars from around the world lecture on vital issues in the field at our biweekly Seminar Series. Lectures, held at lunchtime, are free and open to the public.

2018-2019 Berman Institute Seminar Series
Seminars are video recorded and posted on our YouTube channel.

Upcoming Seminars

May 13, 2019
Holly Fernandez Lynch, JD, MBE
“Evaluating IRB Quality and Effectiveness”
Seminar Details
Feinstone Hall

Past Seminars

September 24, 2018.
Jonathan Moreno, PhD
“Bioethics is Advocacy: Is That So Wrong?”

October 8, 2018
Travis Rieder, PhD
“Bioethics, Pain Medicine, and America’s Opioid Crisis”

October 29, 2018
Matteo Bonotti, PhD
“Opportunity Pluralism and Children’s Health”

November 12, 2018
Peter Buxtun
“Marked Men: In Case You Didn’t Know about Tuskegee”

February 11, 2019
Alex John London, PhD
“Ethical and Regulatory Issues With Autonomous Vehicles”

March 11, 2019
David S. Jones, MD, PhD

March 25, 2019
Marion Danis, MD
“Engaging the Public in Setting Health Care Priorities”

April 8, 2019
Brian Carter, MD
Hutzler-Rives Memorial Lecture: “Insights from patienthood: A pediatrician and bioethicist’s reflections on pediatric palliative care”

April 22, 2019
Effy Vayena, PhD
“Digital Health Ethics: The Systemic Oversight Approach”

Register for the Choose Food Symposium

The CHOOSE FOOD PROJECT aims to help producers and consumers make ethical food choices by giving them access to easy to use, high-quality information about food. It is developing:
  • A Framework for ethical assessment of the food system
  • Educational resources
  • Cutting-edge digital tools
The project aims to guide actors throughout the food value chain to make, market, and choose products more ethically.
To date, our team of experts has articulated 49 Core Ethical Commitments that set parameters for ethical conduct and goals for ethical improvement of food products. These commitments can guide actors along the food chain who have the power to make ethical improvement to production practices. They also provide guidance to consumers who prefer to buy foods that cohere with their ethical values.

Jeremy Greene, MD, PhD

Greene’s most recent book, Generic: The Unbranding of Modern Medicine, narrates the history of generic drugs as a means of exploring problems of similarity and difference in modern medicine.   Generic drugs are never fully identical to the brand name products they imitate.  Rather, their claims to being ‘the same’ lies in proof that they are similar enough in ways that matter to be functionally interchangeable. As the market for generic substitutes has grown–from only 10% of the American pharmaceutical market in 1960 to nearly 80% by 2010–so too have epistemological and epidemiological conflicts over how one can prove that generics are truly equivalent to their brand-name counterparts.   These debates over generic drugs reveal fundamental conflicts over what it means to practice rational medicine, and what role consumers, physicians, insurers, and others should have in defining that rationality.

He has begun work on a new project, Medicine At a Distance, which examines how changing expectations of instantaneous communications through electric, electronic, and digital media transformed the nature of medical knowledge.  Most histories of medical technology focus on heroic diagnostic and therapeutic innovations–like X-rays and artificial hearts–which stand as visible symbols of medical modernity.   His research is focused on recapturing how more  mundane technologies of communication enabled and altered the production, circulation, and consumption of medical knowledge, from telegraph to text pager, telephone to telemedicine, fax machine to Facebook.  This work is supported by a  Faculty Scholars Fellowship from the Greenwall Foundation.

Leonard Rubenstein, JD, LLM

He has engaged in extensive research and writing on human rights, health and national security and armed conflict. His current work focuses on health services in volatile environments. He founded and chairs the Safeguarding Health in Conflict Coalition, a group of humanitarian, human rights, health provider organizations working at the global and national levels, that seeks to reduce attacks on and interference with health workers, patients, facilities and transports.   He is a member of the Lancet Commission on Migration and Health and the editorial board of Military and Humanitarian Ethics of the International Committee of Military Medicine.His writings have appeared in professional journals and in op-eds in major media such as the New York Times and Washington Post

Mr. Rubenstein is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and the Board of Directors of the Global Health Council. He has served on the Governing Council of the American Public Health Association and the Committee on Scientific Freedom and Responsibility of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. He has served as Chair of the Health and Peacebuilding Working Group at the United States Institute of Peace.  He is the recipient of numerous awards, including the Congressional Minority Caucuses’ Healthcare Hero Award, the Sidel-Levy Award for Peace of the American Public Health Association, and the Syrian American Medical Association recognition award.

Maria Merritt, PhD

HONORS AND AWARDS

  • Hastings Center Fellow, elected December 2020
  • Recognition for teaching excellence as principal instructor of JHSPH course, Ethics of Public Health Practice in Developing Countries (221.616.01: classroom), 4th term 2016-17, 2015-16, 2014-15, 2012-13, and 2011-12; (221.616.81: online), 4th term 2017-18 and 2016-17; and as principal instructor of Ethics in Global Health Practice (604.603.86), 2018-19.
  • Student Assembly Special Recognition Award for Outstanding Commitment to Student Success, 2017
  • Principal Investigator, NIH award number 1R01AI114458-01A1, 2015-19, “Assessing Social Justice in Economic Evaluation to Scale up Novel MDR-TB Regimens” (award issued by National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases)
  • Recognition for teaching excellence as principal instructor of JHSPH course, Ethics of Public Health Practice in Developing Countries (221.616.01), 4th term 2015-16; 2014-15; 2012-13; and 2011-12
  • Co-Investigator, NIH award number 1R01AI085147-01A1, 2010-14, “Ancillary Care in Community-Based Research: Deciding What to Do” (PI Holly A. Taylor; award issued by National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases)
  • Greenwall Faculty Scholars Program in Bioethics career development award, 2009-12, “Researchers’ Obligations in Community-Based Research: Resolving Dilemmas of Care”
  • Faculty Innovation Fund, 2007-08, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, “Ancillary Care in Public Health Intervention Research in Resource-Limited Settings: Researchers’ Practices and Decision-Making”(Co-PI Holly A. Taylor)
  • Faculty Fellow, Edmond J. Safra Foundation Center for Ethics, Harvard University, 2005-06
  • Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Clinical Bioethics, National Institutes of Health, 2000-02
  • Rhodes Scholar, Oxford University, 1987-90

Alan Regenberg, MBE

Alan is also engaged in a broad range of research projects and programs, including the Berman Institute’s science programs: the Stem Cell Policy and Ethics (SCOPE) Program; the Program in Ethics and Brain Sciences (PEBS-Neuroethics); and the Hinxton Group, an international consortium on stem cells, ethics and law; and the eSchool+ Initiative. Recent research has focused on using deliberative democracy tools to engage with communities about their values for allocating scarce medical resources like ventilators in disasters like pandemics. Additional recent work has focused on ethical challenges related to gene editing, stem cell research, social media, public engagement, vaccines, and neuroethics. (Publications)