Ethics of Medical Experimentation

According to the dictionary, "vaccination" means "the introduction into humans or domestic animals of microorganisms that have previously been treated to make them harmless for the purpose of inducing the development of immunity." The most famous creator of a vaccine was Louis Pasteur, who created an anthrax vaccine, saving the economy of France. Lesser-known scientist Edward Jenner is also famous in the field of vaccines. In fact, he created the very first, a vaccine for smallpox. He observed that the milkmaids would contract "cowpox," get better and NEVER contract smallpox. Jenner's theory was that cowpox was simply a weaker form of smallpox and if one was to be inoculated with cowpox, the body would develop and immunity to smallpox. It was certainly a revolutionary idea, considering the fact that he lived in the 1700s. Nothing like that had ever been proposed - the very idea that the body could be made "immune," was mind-reeling in that period. Jenner was determined to test his idea. He infected a poor, eight year old boy with cowpox. The bacteria was weak and he recovered. Then Jenner did something brash. He injected the boy with smallpox. Thank God the kid didn't contract it because he had developed an immunity, but imagine what would have happened if he would have died? Yes, this experiment was a success. Did that justify putting a little eight year old boy in danger? What if the smallpox had killed him? Did the end justify the means? The smallpox vaccine saved thousands of lives. Does that justify putting one life in danger? 

In my opinion, it's never acceptable to breach moral, ethical, or legal boundaries to achieve some perceived greater good. Jenner couldn't have been sure of the outcome of his experiment so he was not justified in endangering someone's life. Of course, we don't know the entire situation. I'm merely assuming we had a medical tycoon tricking an ignorant eight year old farm boy who didn't fully understand the situation into becoming a medical victim. On the off chance that the eight year old fully understood the situation, it was still probably wrong given that an eight year old doesn't have the brain capacity to understand the gravity of such a decision. It was wrong of such a brilliant man to take advantage of a little's boy's ignorance. Furthermore, it was wrong of the boy's parents not to protect him. They were humble townspeople, they had to have at least heard of smallpox! There have been thousands upon thousands of cruel, failed experiments on humans in the interest of "medicine." This is an oxymoron at best considering the profession of a doctor is interested in proliferating human life, not  putting it in harm's way. Although God allowed some good to come out of the situation as he so often does, Jenner was NOT justified in any way shape or form. The boy was the first organism Jenner tested his theory on. He did not even bother to test it on an animal first! This is inexcusable. Today's scientists are held to higher standards and have moral and ethical codes that they are required to follow in their experiments. Still, on occasion we see situations like this one that should be obliterated.