Abstract If, as is alleged, challenge trials of vaccines against COVID-19 are likely to save thousands of lives and vastly diminish the economic and social harms of the pandemic while subjecting volunteers to risks that are comparable to kidney donation, then it would seem that the only sensible objection to such trials would be to deny that they have low risks or can be expected to have immense benefits. This essay searches for a philosophical rationale for rejecting challenge trials while supposing that they have huge benefits and relatively low risks. Although it finds some force in objections to challenge trials grounded in the obligations of researchers to limit the harms imposed on some individuals for the benefit of others, it argues that there is no compelling objection to challenge trials of vaccines for COVID-19—if they have the benefits and risks that have been claimed.

中文翻译：

---

挑战试验：有哪些道德问题？


摘要：如果像所声称的那样，针对 COVID-19 的疫苗的挑战试验可能会挽救数千人的生命，并大大减少大流行的经济和社会危害，同时使志愿者面临与肾脏捐赠相当的风险，那么似乎对此类试验的唯一明智的反对意见是否认它们的风险较低或可以预期具有巨大的益处。本文寻找拒绝挑战试验的哲学原理，同时假设挑战试验具有巨大的好处和相对较低的风险。尽管它发现反对质疑试验的理由有一定的力量，因为研究人员有义务为了他人的利益而限制对某些人造成的伤害，但它认为，没有令人信服的反对质疑 COVID-19 疫苗试验的理由——如果具有所声称的好处和风险。