University of Minnesota to Overhaul Research Protections
By Jennifer Couzin-Frankel,
Science
| 06. 15. 2015
More than a decade after a young man committed suicide during a psychiatric clinical trial at the University of Minnesota—and a bioethicist there spent years lobbying for changes to the school’s clinical trials system—the university is announcing major changes to how it oversees trials and protects its most vulnerable research subjects. Last week, the school released a 75-page document describing an effort to restructure its system and calm its critics. Changes include tighter conflict-of-interest rules; a larger institutional review board (IRB) whose members will be compensated; improved training for researchers working with vulnerable populations, such as the severely mentally ill; and a board of external advisers to monitor the university’s efforts.
The report comes after two damning reviews earlier this year: one by a group of experts appointed by the Association for the Accreditation of Human Research Protection Programs and the other by the state’s Office of the Legislative Auditor. The first report examined protections for university clinical trial participants. Among other things, it found that many IRB members did not regularly attend meetings during the first half of 2014—the...
Related Articles
By Jason Liebowitz, The New Yorker | 03.06.2026
When Talaya Reid was in high school, in a quiet suburb of Philadelphia, she developed fatigue so severe that she spent afternoons napping instead of going out with friends. She was lethargic at school and her grades suffered, but after...
By Tania Fabo, Truthout | 02.28.2026
The reproductive tech company Orchid recently launched a genetic test that promises a whole genome sequencing report for embryos. It is the first such test commercially available to couples undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF) and claims to detect things like...
By Pete Shanks
| 02.27.2026
Last month, we published “The Shameful Legacy of Tuskegee” which focused on a proposed experiment in Guinea-Bissau. The study’s plan echoed the notorious Tuskegee disaster, withholding safe, effective vaccines against hepatitis B from some newborns while inoculating others. It was to be financed by the U.S. but performed by a controversial Danish team. That project provoked a multi-national outcry, leading to a remarkable response from the World Health Organization:
WHO has significant concerns regarding the study’s scientific...
By Jenn White, NPR | 02.26.2026