Search results

In this article our objective is to do a very deep analysis into biobusinesses and bioethics in order to identify holistic views concerning business enterprises in biopharmaceutical and biotechnological industries. We are arguing that biobusinesses and biotechnologies are not error free because in reality bio‐technoscientific discoveries and breakthroughs are not viewed as holistic real “natural logic”. They are “techno‐scientific logic”. Through a biosophical deliberation, if we believe that there is a difference between “natural logic” and “scientific logic”, then we may conclude that there are erroneous thoughts which exist and if existence is based on thinking, then false thoughts are as “real” as any misunderstanding among bio‐techno‐scientists and practitioners may thus end up with global catastrophes. Through a biosophical logic, we may choose both paths of “natural logic” and “scientific logic” in order to arrive in a real consensus conclusion. In addition, in this article we have examined the Promethean biosophical and biophilia perceptions and practices of global biopharmaceutical industries and biotechological businesses concerning bioethics.

The prime objective of this article is related to dignified human beings as patients in clinical interventions. The main attention of such a perception focuses on observance of humaneness in relationships among physicians, patients, family members, and community at large. This paper aims to address these issues.

The paper examines in depth, analytical deliberations concerning traditional and modern values of medical care and healthcare knowledge and practices.

Therefore, we need to attest that we live in a global village in which multicultural people must live side‐by‐side, if they desire to peacefully coexist. We must assume that human values are based upon general agreements about ethical issues. Such agreements rely on a framework of equitable treatments of all mankind. Medical ethics is about committed codes and oaths of professional medical authorities to protect natural rights, human rights, and civil rights of patients in clinical interventions. It strives to achieve professional objectives to facilitate patients to be recovered from pain and suffering and regain their health in order to live the good life.

This paper is devoted to define the notions relevant to the philosophies of quality of life, ethical, and moral problems concerning clinical medicine, and preventive care systems. It analyzes certain ethical and moral distinctions between medical care and healthcare services, and indicates that cautions should be observed in discussing these notions within the context of preventive care and clinical care systems.

This paper explores the following questions: What is the meaning of a psychosomatic normal life? How life should be respected? What are the meta‐medical practices? What should be the logical and philosophical foundations for medical care and healthcare ethics? How should clinicians and practitioners respect not only cost‐benefit analysis but also consider cost‐effectiveness analysis in providing and promoting medical care and healthcare services for patients?