Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-m9kch Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-01T09:23:05.006Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Feminist Resources for Biomedical Research: Lessons from the HPV Vaccines

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 March 2020

Inmaculada De Melo-Martín  and
Kristen Intemann
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Several feminist philosophers of science have argued that social and political values are compatible with, and may even enhance, scientific objectivity. A variety of normative recommendations have emerged regarding how to identify, manage, and critically evaluate social values in science. In particular, several feminist theorists have argued that scientific communities ought to: 1) include researchers with diverse experiences, interests, and values, with equal opportunity and authority to scrutinize research; 2) investigate or “study up” scientific phenomena from the perspectives, interests, and conditions of marginalized stakeholders potentially affected by the research; and 3) make gender, ethnicity, class, and geographical location “visible,” or use them as categories of analysis when appropriate. Yet, more work is needed to determine what exactly these recommendations would require, and the benefits they would yield, in specific research contexts.

Using the recent development of the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines, we examine how these three feminist recommendations would have applied. We argue that these principles would have yielded several epistemic and social benefits in the HPV case, as well as in biomedical research more generally. That is, biomedical research guided by these principles would not only be epistemically superior, but also more socially responsible.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Hypatia , Volume 26 , Issue 1 , Winter 2011 , pp. 79 - 101
Copyright
Copyright © 2011 by Hypatia, Inc.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adam, Y., et al. 2008. Predictors of persistent cytologic abnormalities after treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in Soweto, South Africa: A cohort study in a HIV high prevalence population. BMC Cancer 8:211.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Anderson, Elizabeth. 2004. Uses of value judgments in science: A general argument, with lessons from a case study of feminist research on divorce. Hypatia 19 (1): 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, Elizabeth. 2006. The epistemology of democracy. Episteme 3 (1): 9–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blossom, D.B., et al. 2007. Human papillomavirus genotypes associated with cervical cytologic abnormalities and HIV infection in Ugandan women. Journal of Medical Virology 79 (6): 758–65.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bosch, F.X., et al. 2002. The causal relation between human papillomavirus and cervical cancer. Journal of Clinical Pathology 55 (4): 244–65.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bryan, J.T. 2007. Developing an HPV vaccine to prevent cervical cancer and genital warts. Vaccine 25 (16): 3001–06.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cartwright, Nancy. 2006. Well‐ordered science: Evidence for use. Philosophy of Science 73 (5): 981–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castellsagué, X. 2008. Natural history and epidemiology of HPV infection and cervical cancer. Gynecological Oncology 110 (3 Suppl 2): S4–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chirca, P., and Torreele, E. 2006. Global framework on essential health R&D. Lancet 367 (9522): 1560–61.Google Scholar
Clifford, G.M., et al. 2005. Worldwide distribution of human papillomavirus types in cytologically normal women in the International Agency for Research on Cancer HPV prevalence surveys: A pooled analysis. Lancet 366 (9490): 991–98.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Committee on Maximizing the Potential of Women in Academic Science and Engineering, National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, and Institute of Medicine. 2006. Beyond bias and barriers: Fulfilling the potential of women in academic science and engineering. Washington, D.C.: The National Academy Press.Google Scholar
Crasnow, Sharon. 2006. Feminist anthropology and sociology: Issues for social science. In Handbook of the philosophy of science, volume 15: Philosophy of anthropology and sociology, ed. Turner, S. and Risjord, M.Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Currat, L.J., et al. 2004. 10/90 report on health research 2003–2004. Geneva: Global Forum for Health Research.Google Scholar
Daniels, N. 2007. Just health: Meeting health needs fairly. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, D.W., and Silver, B.D. 2003. Stereotype threat and race of interviewer effects in a survey on political knowledge. American Journal of Political Science 47 (1): 33–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, R.E., et al. 2009. Interviewer effects in public health surveys. Health Education Research 25 (1): 14–26.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Downs, L.S., et al. 2008. The disparity of cervical cancer in diverse populations. Gynecological Oncology 109 (2 Suppl) S22–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunne, E.F., and Markowitz, L.E. 2006. Genital human papillomavirus infection. Clinical Infectious Diseases 43 (5): 624–29.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Evelyn, B., et al. 2001. Participation of racial/ethnic groups in clinical trials and race‐related labeling: A review of new molecular entities approved 1995–1999. Journal of the National Medical Association 93 (12 Suppl): 18S–24S.Google ScholarPubMed
Fernández‐San Millán, A., et al. 2008. Human papillomavirus L1 protein expressed in tobacco chloroplasts self‐assembles into virus‐like particles that are highly immunogenic. Plant Biotechnology Journal 6 (5): 427–41.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Flory, J.H., and Kitcher, P. 2004. Global health and the scientific research agenda. Philosophy and Public Affairs 32 (1): 36–65.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ford, J.G., et al. 2008. Barriers to recruiting underrepresented populations to cancer clinical trials: A systematic review. Cancer 112 (2): 228–42.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fraillery, D., et al. 2007. Salmonella enterica serovar Typhi Ty21a expressing human papillomavirus type 16 L1 as a potential live vaccine against cervical cancer and typhoid fever. Clinical and Vaccine Immunology 14 (10): 1285–95.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Franco, E.L., Duarte‐Franco, E., and Ferenczy, A. 2001. Cervical cancer: Epidemiology, prevention and the role of human papillomavirus infection. Canadian Medical Association Journal 164 (7): 1017–25.Google ScholarPubMed
Franco, E.L., and Harper, D.M. 2005. Vaccination against human papillomavirus infection: A new paradigm in cervical cancer control. Vaccine 23 (17–18): 2388–94.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Frazer, I.H. 2004. Prevention of cervical cancer through papillomavirus vaccination. Nature Reviews Immunology 4 (1): 46–54.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
The Future II Study Group. 2007a. Quadrivalent vaccine against human papillomavirus to prevent high‐grade cervical lesions. New England Journal of Medicine 356 (19): 1915–27.Google Scholar
The Future II Study Group. 2007b. Effect of prophylactic human papillomavirus L1 virus‐like‐particle vaccine on risk of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2, grade 3, and adenocarcinoma in situ: A combined analysis of four randomised clinical trials. Lancet 369 (9576): 1861–68.Google Scholar
García Carrancá, A., and Galván, S.C. 2007. Vaccines against human papillomavirus: Perspectives for controlling cervical cancer. Expert Review of Vaccines 6 (4): 497–510.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Garland, S.M., et al. 2007. Quadrivalent vaccine against human papillomavirus to prevent anogenital diseases. New England Journal of Medicine 356 (19): 1928–43.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Govan, V.A. 2008. A novel vaccine for cervical cancer: Quadrivalent human papillomavirus (types 6, 11, 16 and 18) recombinant vaccine (Gardasil). Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management 4 (1): 65–70.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harding, Sandra. 2004. A socially relevant philosophy of science? Resources from standpoint theory's controversiality. Hypatia 19 (1): 25–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harding, Sandra. 2008. Sciences from below: Feminisms, postcolonialities, and modernities. Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harper, D.M. 2008. Impact of vaccination with Cervarix (trade mark) on subsequent HPV‐16/18 infection and cervical disease in women 15–25 years of age. Gynecological Oncology 110 (3 Suppl 1): S11–17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harper, D.M. 2006. Sustained efficacy up to 4.5 years of a bivalent L1 virus‐like particle vaccine against human papillomavirus types 16 and 18: Follow‐up from a randomised control trial. Lancet 367 (9518): 1247–55.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harris, J. 2005. Scientific research is a moral duty. Journal of Medical Ethics 31 (4): 242–48.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hildesheim, A., et al. 2007. Effect of human papillomavirus 16/18 L1 viruslike particle vaccine among young women with preexisting infection: A randomized trial. Journal of the American Medical Association 298 (7): 743–53.Google ScholarPubMed
Institute of Medicine (IOM). 2002. Unequal treatment: Confronting racial and ethnic disparities in health care. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
Intemann, K. 2009. Why diversity matters: Understanding and applying the diversity component of the NSF's broader impacts criterion. Social Epistemology 23 (3–4): 249–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Intemann, K., and de Melo‐Martín, I. 2008. Regulating scientific research: Should scientists be left alone? FASEB Journal 22 (3): 654–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Intemann, K., and de Melo‐Martín, I. 2010. Social values and scientific evidence: The case of the HPV vaccine. Biology and Philosophy 25 (2): 203–13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jha, P., et al. 2002. Improving the health of the global poor. Science 295 (5562): 2036–39.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Johannes, C.B., Crawford, S.L., and McKinlay, J.B. 1997. Interviewer effects in a cohort study. American Journal of Epidemiology 146 (5): 429–38.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kahn, J.A., and Burk, R.D. 2007. Papillomavirus vaccines in perspective. Lancet 369 (9580): 2135–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kibuuka, H., et al. 2010. A phase 1/2 study of a multiclade HIV‐1 DNA plasmid prime and recombinant adenovirus serotype 5 boost vaccine in HIV‐Uninfected East Africans (RV 172). Journal of Infectious Diseases 201 (4): 600–07.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kourany, Janet. 2003. A philosophy of science for the twenty‐first century. Philosophy of Science 70 (January): 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
London, A.J. 2006. What is social and global justice to bioethics or bioethics to social and global justice? Hastings Center Reports 36 (4): 3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Longino, Helen. 1990. Science as social knowledge. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Longino, Helen. 1996. Cognitive and non‐cognitive values in science: Rethinking the dichotomy. In Feminism, science, and the philosophy of science, ed. Nelson, Lynn Hankinson and Nelson, Jack. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
Longino, Helen. 2002. The fate of knowledge. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luo, Airong. 2008. Supporting participation in communities of practice by scientists from developing countries: The case of high energy physics. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 45 (1): 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mandic, A., and Vujkov, T. 2004. Human papillomavirus vaccine as a new way of preventing cervical cancer: A dream or the future? Annals of Oncology 15 (2): 197–200.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McPartland, T.S., et al. 2005. Men's perceptions and knowledge of human papillomavirus (HPV) infection and cervical cancer. Journal of American College Health 53 (5): 225–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moniz, M., et al. 2003. HPV DNA vaccines. Frontiers in Bioscience 8:d55–68.Google ScholarPubMed
Muñoz, N., et al. 2004. Against which human papillomavirus types shall we vaccinate and screen? The international perspective. International Journal of Cancer 111 (2): 278–85.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
National Science Foundation (NSF), Division of Science Resources Statistics. 2009. Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering: 2009, NSF 09‐305. Arlington, Va. http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/wmpd/ (accessed August 4, 2010).Google Scholar
Nussbaum, Martha. 1999. Sex and Social Justice. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Paavonen, J., et al. 2007. HPV PATRICIA study group. Efficacy of a prophylactic adjuvanted bivalent L1 virus‐like‐particle vaccine against infection with human papillomavirus types 16 and 18 in young women: An interim analysis of a phase III double‐blind, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 369 (9580): 2161–70. Erratum in: Lancet 2007; 370 (9596): 1414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pagliusi, S.R., and Teresa Aguado, M. 2004. Efficacy and other milestones for human papillomavirus vaccine introduction. Vaccine 23 (5): 569–78.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Parkin, D.M., et al. 2005. Global cancer statistics, 2002. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians 55 (2): 74–108.Google ScholarPubMed
Pogge, T.W. 2002. World poverty and human rights: Cosmopolitan responsibilities and reforms. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Pogge, T.W. 2009. The health impact fund: Boosting pharmaceutical innovation without obstructing free access. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 18 (1): 78–86.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Powers, M., and Faden, R. 2006. Social justice: The moral foundations of public health and health policy. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Resnik, D.B. 2004. The distribution of biomedical research resources and international justice. Developing World Bioethics 4 (1): 42–57.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rhodes, R. 2005. Rethinking research ethics. American Journal of Bioethics 5 (1): 7–28.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rolin, Kristina. 2006. The bias paradox in feminist standpoint epistemology. Episteme 3 (1): 125–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rowhani‐Rahbar, A., et al. 2007. The impact of HIV status and type on the clearance of human papillomavirus infection among Senegalese women. Journal of Infectious Diseases 196 (6): 887–94.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Safaeian, M., Solomon, D., and Castle, P.E. 2007. Cervical cancer prevention—cervical screening: Science in evolution. Obstetrics and Gynecology Clinics of North America 34 (4): 739–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sanders, G.D., and Taira, A.V. 2003. Cost‐effectiveness of a potential vaccine for human papillomavirus. Emerging Infectious Diseases 9 (1): 37–48.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sankar, P., et al. 2004. Genetic research and health disparities. Journal of the American Medical Association 291 (24): 2985–89.Google ScholarPubMed
Santi, L., et al. 2008. An efficient plant viral expression system generating orally immunogenic Norwalk virus‐like particles. Vaccine 26 (15): 1846–54.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schiller, J.T., and Lowy, D.R. 1996. Papillomavirus‐like particles and HPV vaccine development. Seminars in Cancer Biology 7 (6): 373–82.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schiller, J.T., and Nardelli‐Haefliger, D. 2006. Chapter 17: Second generation HPV vaccines to prevent cervical cancer. Vaccine 24 (Suppl 3): S3/147–53.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Slade, B.A., et al. 2009. Postlicensure safety surveillance for quadrivalent human papillomavirus recombinant vaccine. Journal of the American Medical Association 302 (7): 750–57.Google ScholarPubMed
Solomon, Miriam. 2001. Social empiricism. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Solomon, Miriam. 2006. Norms of epistemic diversity. Episteme 3 (1): 23–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stanley, A., DeLia, D., and Cantor, J. 2007. Racial disparity and technology diffusion: The case of cardioverter defibrillator implants, 1996–2001. Journal of the American Medical Association 9 (3): 201–07.Google Scholar
Suba, E.J., et al. 2006. Systems analysis of real‐world obstacles to successful cervical cancer prevention in developing countries. American Journal of Public Health 96 (3): 480–87.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tammemagi, C.M. 2007. Racial/ethnic disparities in breast and gynecologic cancer treatment and outcomes. Current Opinion in Obstetrics and Gynecology 19 (1): 31–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
UNAIDS. 2006. 2006 report on the global AIDS epidemic. Geneva: UNAIDS.Google Scholar
UNICEF. 2003. The state of the world's children 2004. New York: UNICEF.Google Scholar
Wagner, C.S., et al. 2001. Science and technology collaboration: Building capacity in developing countries? Santa Monica, Calif.: RAND. http://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR1357.0/MR1357.0.pdf (accessed August 4, 2010).Google Scholar
Waller, J., et al. 2004. Human papillomavirus and cervical cancer: Issues for biobehavioral and psychosocial research. Annals of Behavioral Medicine 27 (1): 68–79.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Warzecha, H., et al. 2003. Oral immunogenicity of human papillomavirus‐like particles expressed in potato. Journal of Virology 77 (16): 8702–11.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wendler, D., et al. 2006. Are racial and ethnic minorities less willing to participate in health research? PLoS Medicine 3 (2) e19.Google ScholarPubMed
World Health Organization (WHO). 2008. Viral cancers: Human papillomavirus . http://www.who.int/vaccine_research/diseases/viral_cancers/en/index3.html (accessed August 4, 2010).Google Scholar
Wylie, Alison. 2003. Why standpoint matters. In Science and other cultures: Issues in philosophies of science and technology, ed. Figueroa, Robert and Harding, Sandra. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Wylie, Alison, and Nelson, Lynn Hankinson. 2007. Coming to terms with the values of science: Insights from feminist science studies scholarship. In Value‐free science: Ideals and illusions, ed. Kincaid, Harold, Dupré, John, and Wylie, Alison. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar