It Takes Two: Ethical Dualism in the Vegetative State

To aid neuroscientists in determining the ethical limits of their work and its applications, neuroethical problems need to be identified, catalogued, and analyzed from the standpoint of an ethical framework. Many hospitals have already established either autonomy or welfare-centered theories as their adopted ethical framework. Unfortunately, the choice of an ethical framework resists resolution: each of these two moral theories claims priority at the exclusion of the other, but for patients with neurological pathologies, concerns about the patient’s welfare are treated as meaningless without consideration of the patient’s expressed wishes, and vice versa. Ethicists have long fought over whether suffering or autonomy should be our primary concern, but in neuroethics a resolution of this question is essential to determine the treatment of patients in medical and legal limbo. I propose a solution to this problem in the form of ethical dualism. This is a conservative measure in that it retains both sides of the debate: both happiness and autonomy have intrinsic value. However, this move is often met with resistance because of its more complex nature—it is more difficult to make a decision when there are two parallel sets of values that must be considered than when there is just one such set. The monist theories, though, do not provide enough explanatory power: namely, I will present two recently publicized cases where it is clear that neither ethical value on its own (neither welfare nor autonomy) can fully account for how a vegetative patient should be treated. From the neuroethical cases of Terri Schiavo and Lauren Richardson, I will argue that a dualist framework is superior to its monist predecessors, and I will describe the main features of such an account.     

Urinary Arsenic and Cadmium Associations with Findings from Cranial MRI in American Indians: Data from the Strong Heart Study

Background: Arsenic and cadmium are known cardiovascular toxicants that pose disproportionate risk to rural communities where environmental exposures are high. American Indians have high vascular risk, which may be attributable in part to these exposures.Objective: We examined urine metal concentrations in association with magnetic resonance imaging findings of vascular brain injury or cerebral atrophy in adult American Indians.Methods: We measured arsenic and cadmium in American Indian participants from the Strong Heart Study (1989–1991) and evaluated these associations with later (2010–2013) measures of infarct, hemorrhage, white matter hyperintensity (WMH) grade, brain and hippocampal volume, and sulcal and ventricle atrophy using nested multivariate regression analyses.Results: Among participants with available data (N=687), the median urine arsenic:creatinine ratio was 7.54μg/g [interquartile range (IQR): 4.90–11.93] and the cadmium:creatinine ratio was 0.96μg/g (IQR: 0.61–1.51). Median time between metal measurement and brain imaging was 21 y (range: 18–25 y). Statistical models detected significant associations between arsenic and higher burden of WMH [grade increase=0.014 (95% CI: 0.000, 0.028) per 10% increase in arsenic]; and between cadmium and presence of lacunar infarcts [relative risk (RR)=1.024 (95% CI: 1.004, 1.045) per 10% increase in cadmium].Discussion: This population-based cohort of American Indian elders had measured values of urine arsenic and cadmium several times higher than previous population- and clinic-based studies in the United States and Mexico, and comparable values with European industrial workers. Our findings of associations for arsenic and cadmium exposures with vascular brain injury are consistent with established literature. Environmental toxicant accumulation is modifiable; public health policy may benefit from focusing on reductions in environmental metals. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP6930     

Psychological and social support associations with mortality and cardiovascular disease in middle-aged American Indians: the Strong Heart Study

Purpose

Our study examined psychosocial risk and protective features affecting cardiovascular and mortality disparities in American Indians, including stress, anger, cynicism, trauma, depression, quality of life, and social support.

Methods

The Strong Heart Family Study cohort recruited American Indian adults from 12 communities over 3 regions in 2001–2003 (N = 2786). Psychosocial measures included Cohen Perceived Stress, Spielberger Anger Expression, Cook-Medley cynicism subscale, symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder, Centers for Epidemiologic Studies Depression scale, Short Form 12-a quality of life scale, and the Social Support and Social Undermining scale. Cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality were evaluated by surveillance and physician adjudication through 2017.

Results

Participants were middle-aged, 40% male, with mean 12 years formal education. Depression symptoms were correlated with anger, cynicism, poor quality of life, isolation, criticism; better social support was correlated with lower cynicism, anger, and trauma. Adjusted time-to-event regressions found that depression, (poor) quality of life, and social isolation scores formed higher risk for mortality and cardiovascular events, and social support was associated with lower risk. Social support partially explained risk associations in causal mediation analyses.

Conclusion

Altogether, our findings suggest that social support is associated with better mood and quality of life; and lower cynicism, stress, and disease risk—even when said risk may be increased by comorbidities. Future research should examine whether enhancing social support can prospectively reduce risk, as an efficient, cost-effective intervention opportunity that may be enacted at the community level.