↓ Skip to main content

Limiting and facilitating access to innovations in medicine and agriculture: a brief exposition of the ethical arguments

Overview of attention for article published in Life Sciences, Society and Policy, April 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
26 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Limiting and facilitating access to innovations in medicine and agriculture: a brief exposition of the ethical arguments
Published in
Life Sciences, Society and Policy, April 2014
DOI 10.1186/s40504-014-0008-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Cristian Timmermann

Abstract

Taking people's longevity as a measure of good life, humankind can proudly say that the average person is living a much longer life than ever before. The AIDS epidemic has however for the first time in decades stalled and in some cases even reverted this trend in a number of countries. Climate change is increasingly becoming a major challenge for food security and we can anticipate that hunger caused by crop damages will become much more common.Since many of the challenges humanity faced in the past were overcome by inventive solutions coming from the life sciences, we are compelled to reconsider how we incentivize science and technology development so that those in need can benefit more broadly from scientific research. There is a huge portion of the world population that is in urgent need for medicines to combat diseases that are currently neglected by the scientific community and could immensely benefit from agricultural research that specifically targets their environmental conditions. At the same time efforts have to be made to make the fruits of current and future research more widely accessible. These changes would have to be backed by a range of moral arguments to attract people with diverging notions of global justice. This article explores the main ethical theories used to demand a greater share in the benefits from scientific progress for the poor. Since life sciences bring about a number of special concerns, a short list of conflictive issues is also offered.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Mexico 1 4%
Unknown 25 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 6 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 19%
Researcher 5 19%
Student > Master 3 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 8%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 4 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 8 31%
Environmental Science 3 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 12%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 4%
Other 4 15%
Unknown 4 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 October 2021.
All research outputs
#8,209,032
of 25,432,721 outputs
Outputs from Life Sciences, Society and Policy
#79
of 127 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#75,788
of 239,434 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Life Sciences, Society and Policy
#4
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,432,721 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 127 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.5. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 239,434 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.