Are ethics promulgations self-defeating?

Alan Wertheimer argues that promulgating some ethical standards of international clinical research may be self-defeating: the intended purpose of these standards is to promote the interests of subjects and communities in LMICs, while the outcome of promulgation could be to undermine these very same interests. If enforced, such standards would increase the costs of performing beneficial research in LMICs, potentially diverting opportunities to participate in this research away from those who have no other access to the care participation allows. I argue that these standards are really intended as deontological constraints protecting subjects from being exploited by research sponsors. First, I show that Wertheimer begs the question against this deontological interpretation of ethics promulgations, rejecting it on non-deontological grounds. I go on to show that non-exploitation is an important goal on its own, sometimes independent from-and sometimes even outweighing-the goal of promoting the interests of subjects and communities in LMICs. I conclude by suggesting that those who criticize the promulgation of non-exploitation on the grounds that exploitative practices help those badly off might do best to reconsider the background assumption that sponsors in wealthier countries have no pre-existing obligation to promote the interests of the world's poor.