4, 2012, at the American Heart Association's Scientific Sessions annual meeting and published in the Journal of the American Medical Association – provides new insights right into a subset of heart sufferers with acute coronary syndromes whose risk for cardiovascular events remained unchanged in spite of taking medicine that successfully reduced platelet clotting function. Platelet-wealthy clot development after artherosclerotic plaque rupture has a major function in the occurrence of ACS events, including coronary attack and stroke, said senior writer Matthew T. Roe, M.D., MHS, a cardiologist at member and Duke of the Duke Clinical Study Institute. It seems intuitive that by reducing the clotting tendency with anti-platelet drugs, a reduction will be seen by us in the chance of cardiovascular events, but our study demonstrates for some individuals, this may be a more complex interaction.The existing controversy over the publishing of H5N1 research is very good news for just one unlikely group: bioethicists. Controversy in medicine breeds discussion about ethical queries, and the more folks are talking, the much more likely experts are to look for ethical guidance because they design research. Some bioethicists believe the ultimate way to address such queries is via ethics discussion services that act individually of institutional review boards in order that formal regulatory and informal consulting features are kept separate. Among those bioethicists is definitely David Magnus, director of Stanford University Middle for Bioethics in California. Today in Technology Translational Medicine Writing, Magnus and his co-workers argue that IRBs are ill-equipped to supply consultation to experts on thorny protocol style problems in translational areas such as for example DNA banking and stem cell therapies because IRBs already are overseeing protocols as regulators.