CASE 1_Group Activity on Bioethics_Sci Adv L8 by Sarah Pamela Baul https://padlet.com/pamelabaul/a8tvhsils6nsq0cb Post the group's final answer (or the dominant and minority view). Please do not forget to indicate the names of the group members in the post. en-us 2020-09-02 15:32:17 UTC 2020-09-07 10:13:07 UTC hello@padlet.com https://padlet.net/icons/png/1f4ad.png He shouldn't take the steroids. miguelmindanao1 https://padlet.com/pamelabaul/a8tvhsils6nsq0cb/wish/716757586 >Non Maleficence

- It says that he should choose what causes the least amount of harm to himself. It could have terrible, long term consequences that can affect him in ways he might not expect. Also, if we said yes for him to take the steroids, there is a possibility that we might inflict harm to him.  

>Beneficence

-He should choose what is better for his health. Taking steroids would be very harmful to him in the long run.  It could affect his immune system causing him to be more susceptible to other diseases. It may also cause him to become addicted to the substance because steroids, overtime, can be addictive.

Group 1 - Kalinisan, Mindanao, Sombe, Uctum, Valderama


]]> 2020-09-03 02:09:09 UTC https://padlet.com/pamelabaul/a8tvhsils6nsq0cb/wish/716757586 Carl should not take the steroids. https://padlet.com/pamelabaul/a8tvhsils6nsq0cb/wish/716775693 He shouldn't take it because it violates nonmaleficence, since taking it without prescription (from the doctor) may lead to unintended side effects. He is also not mature enough to make his own medical decisions,  as doing so would contradict the principle of Autonomy, unless of course he was given permission to do so by his parents. He has the right to choose whether or not to take the steroids, and the pressure from his friends should not affect his decision, and he should choose not to take it because it also sets a bad example to the new generation of football players.
Group 4- Delos Santos, Goño, Santos, Soriente, Tompong]]> 2020-09-03 02:18:50 UTC https://padlet.com/pamelabaul/a8tvhsils6nsq0cb/wish/716775693 Carl should not take the steroids until he consults with a doctor about medical supplements which also help in healing muscle tone. https://padlet.com/pamelabaul/a8tvhsils6nsq0cb/wish/720352389 When observing nonmaleficence, you should minimize harm in which are the side effects of the steroids that have the possibility of harming the body and cause of addiction. For autonomy and informed consent, he must also talk to a doctor to learn more about the use of steroids rather than believing the influences of people who are not in this field of study. For beneficence, the medical supplements provide help and minimized risks while also helping in the recovery of his muscle tone.
Group 3- Basman, Biazon, Suzuki, Villanueva, Zabella]]> 2020-09-04 07:17:03 UTC https://padlet.com/pamelabaul/a8tvhsils6nsq0cb/wish/720352389 Carl must not take the steriods. josephespaldon1 https://padlet.com/pamelabaul/a8tvhsils6nsq0cb/wish/720367821 Carl must not take the steriods because those can bring harm to his body due to the side effects. Without professional guidance to tell him the real effects of steriods, Carl could find himself misusing them and potentially abusing them. Carl refusing to take steriods would showcase two (2) bioethical principles, (1) beneficence and (2) nonmaleficence. He would exhibit beneficence because refusing to take substances without professional would be an example of self-care. This would lessen his chances of forming addictions and bodily harm. another benefit wouldn't have to face any physical problems in the future. The second principle he would be exhibiting is nonmaleficence. This is because refusing the steriods means that he chooses his own health over his victory in sports. He would stay healthy and worry-free since there would be no side effects that would affect his body.

Group 5 - Urro, Abarquez, Espaldon, Rosario]]> 2020-09-04 07:31:25 UTC https://padlet.com/pamelabaul/a8tvhsils6nsq0cb/wish/720367821 Carl shouldn't take the steroids. https://padlet.com/pamelabaul/a8tvhsils6nsq0cb/wish/723059262 In the Bioethical principle of Nonmalificence, you wan't the least harm to be done. But if Carl takes the steroids, he would be inflicting a lot of long term damage to his body. This includes high blood pressure, blood clots, heart attacks, strokes, being more prone to infections and diseases, and many more horrible things.

In the Bioethical principle of Beneficence, you want to do good. And if Carl doesn't take the steroids, he'll be saving himself from potential addiction to the substance and potential death or harm from suffering the side effects. Even if there is a scholarship on the line, we believe that the welfare of oneself is more important.

Group 2 - Dela Cruz, Fischeder, Lapus, Rebadulla, Rojas]]> 2020-09-06 05:19:28 UTC https://padlet.com/pamelabaul/a8tvhsils6nsq0cb/wish/723059262