The problem is not directly the ethics board disagreeing, but that you need institutional protection for otherwise an angry prosecutor who wants to do something to reduce the spread about the disease can easily throw you into prison.
Ethic board approval would be a way to build up protection against that kind of institutional attack.
I don’t think your information video will prevent you from going to prison for manslaughter when someone in your study dies from it.
You are pointing out real costs to this idea and I don’t disagree that what you describe are real risks.
But it seems extremely unlikely – effectively impossible – that anything like this would ever be approved by an “ethics board” so seeking approval would be a waste of resources.
Someone, or some group of people, being prosecuted or risking being prosecuted would potentially be a heroic sacrifice – not a flagrant mistake.
The problem is not directly the ethics board disagreeing, but that you need institutional protection for otherwise an angry prosecutor who wants to do something to reduce the spread about the disease can easily throw you into prison.
Ethic board approval would be a way to build up protection against that kind of institutional attack.
I don’t think your information video will prevent you from going to prison for manslaughter when someone in your study dies from it.
You are pointing out real costs to this idea and I don’t disagree that what you describe are real risks.
But it seems extremely unlikely – effectively impossible – that anything like this would ever be approved by an “ethics board” so seeking approval would be a waste of resources.
Someone, or some group of people, being prosecuted or risking being prosecuted would potentially be a heroic sacrifice – not a flagrant mistake.
The lead of the study can be in a country that is unlikely to prosecute, or anonymous.