How do you think two crucial research events the creation of the Nuremberg Code and the U.S. Public Health Service Syphilis study at Tuskegee influenced the role of Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)
Student’s Name
Professor’s Name
Course Title
Date of Submission
The Nuremberg code was created in 1947 by American judges who were responsible for judging of Nazi doctors accused of leading deadly and torturous human trials in the concentration camps during World War II. According to Rice (2008) the Nuremberg code outlines some research ethics values for human experimentation set as a consequence of the successive Nuremberg trials at the end of the Second World War. The Nuremberg code influenced the role of Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) since in 1953; the World Medical Association was aggravated to create documents that would use the Nuremberg code to the exercise of human research in the health community. The declaration of Helsinki was an expansion of the Nuremberg code and was initially adopted in 1964. This declaration led to the formulation of the notion of a sovereign committee which advanced into the institutional review board (IRB) system. The role of the IRB system is to protect the rights and welfare of human research subjects which is at the core of the Nuremberg code.
On the other hand, the U.S. public health service syphilis study at Tuskegee began in 1932. The study focused on studying the effect of untreated syphilis among men of color. However, the investigation violated the rights of the participants since most of them died after they were denied treatment by the experimenters. A story that was published in the news by various media stations in 1973 uncovered the experiments.

The news infuriated people and led to the support of a National act by the Congress which created the National Commission for the shielding of human participants in experiments. The national commission published the “Belmont report” which is a milestone of ethical codes in the human examination. The Belmont report is still relevant today as it guides the Institutional review boards (IRBs) and serves as the foundation of human subjects defense principles (Rice, 2008).
ReferenceRice, T. W. (2008). The historical, ethical, and legal background of human-subjects research. Respiratory care, 53(10), 1325-1329.