Ethics Issues Clause Samples

Ethics Issues. The activities of the proposal PACE-Net Plus are not directly related to any ethical issues. The project will implement a follow-up of the activities to ensure that European guidelines with regards to ethical issues are entirely respected
View Source
Ethics Issues. All human research currently performed by our research groups has been reviewed by the respective ethical committees. By default, all data collection proposed in WPS1-3 (research WPs) will be performed at ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ University (UPJS) which has a currently approved research protocol for behavioural data collection as well as for EEG imaging studies (see copies of approvals below). The raw subject data will be analysed only at ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ University. Only summary data plots from which no individual data can be extracted will be used for consultations and collaboration on the research with the partners. If a decision is made in the future that additional data collection needs to happen at one of the other institutions, or if additional research would be planned, not covered by the currently approved protocol, the experiments will be performed only upon approval of the procedures and the informed consent forms by the Ethical Committee / Institutional Review Board of the ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ University, Austrian Academy of Science, University of California at Riverside, Boston University, Massachusetts General Hospital or Oregon Health and Science University. Again, such data will then not travel between countries in any raw form, as only summary statistics and plots will be shared with the other collaborators for the collaboration purposes. For illustration purposes, the currently approved research protocol documents (ethical committee approvals, informed consent forms, subject recruitment flyers) from UCR, OHSU (via Portland VA) and BU are uploaded in SyGMa. Also, if any raw data are to be exchanged among the collaborating institutions, a data sharing agreement between the organizations will be prepared to assure that national and international data and personal privacy protection standards are implemented (a sample currently existing data sharing agreement between UPJS and MGH is uploaded in SyGMa). The work proposed in WP4 (brain training game) within this grant does not involve human subjects, as the only activity proposed here is software development for one of the components of the brain training game that OHSU and UCR are developing independently, and so no human subject testing will be performed within this grant. Our subjects will be adult listeners capable of giving informed consent. The project plan does not require to work with children or vulnerable adults. Both genders will be tested unbiased. The majority of participants will be recruited through fliers placed thro...
View Source
Ethics Issues. The NewProt project positively contributes to a series of ethically desirable topics. The use of (bio)informatics in the design of mutation experiments will reduce the number of experiments needed to achieve the scientific goals. This obviously contributes to the European competitiveness, in the context of ethical considerations it must be noted that a reduction in the number of experiments will also lead to reduces environmental stress, and in some cases also to a reduction in the use of test animals. The experimental partners (EMAUG, ENZYM, INGEN) use only genetically engineered microorganisms such as yeast or bacteria at the S1 level (GRAS status, risk group 1). The laboratories used fulfil the national requirements for experimental work at the S1 level. Hence, all work carried out under NewProt will be free of any ethical issues.
View Source

Related to Ethics Issues

  • ETHICS IN PUBLIC CONTRACTING This Contract incorporates by reference Article 9 of the Arlington County Purchasing Resolution, as well as all state and federal laws related to ethics, conflicts of interest or bribery, including the State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act (Code of Virginia § 2.2-3100 et seq.), the Virginia Governmental Frauds Act (Code of Virginia § 18.2-498.1 et seq.) and Articles 2 and 3 of Chapter 10 of Title 18.2 of the Code of Virginia, as amended (§ 18.2-438 et seq.). The Contractor certifies that its proposal was made without collusion or fraud; that it has not offered or received any kickbacks or inducements from any other offeror, supplier, manufacturer or subcontractor; and that it has not conferred on any public employee having official responsibility for this procurement any payment, loan, subscription, advance, deposit of money, services or anything of more than nominal value, present or promised, unless consideration of substantially equal or greater value was exchanged.

  • Ethics No officer, agent or employee of the Board is or shall be employed by Provider or has or shall have a financial interest, directly or indirectly, in this Agreement or the compensation to be paid hereunder except as may be permitted in writing by the Board’s Code of Ethics, adopted May 25, 2011 (11-0525-PO2), as amended from time to time, which policy is hereby incorporated by reference into and made part of this Agreement as if fully set forth herein.

  • PROCUREMENT ETHICS Contractor understands that a person who is interested in any way in the sale of any supplies, services, construction, or insurance to the State of Utah is violating the law if the person gives or offers to give any compensation, gratuity, contribution, loan, reward, or any promise thereof to any person acting as a procurement officer on behalf of the State of Utah, or who in any official capacity participates in the procurement of such supplies, services, construction, or insurance, whether it is given for their own use or for the use or benefit of any other person or organization.

  • Submission of Grievances A. Any employee or group of employees shall have the right to present a grievance. No employee or group of employees shall be hindered from or disciplined for exercising this right. B. If any two (2) or more employees have essentially the same grievance they may, and if requested by the County must, collectively present and pursue their grievance if they report to the same immediate supervisor. C. If the grievant is a group of more than three (3) employees, the group shall, at the request of the County, appoint one (1) or two (2) employees to speak for the collective group. To be considered a grievant in a group grievance, each employee must be individually identified as a grievant when the grievance is submitted at Step 2.

  • Open Issues (a) Notwithstanding any provision of the Registry Agreement to the contrary (including Sections 7.6 and 7.7 thereof), Registry Operator agrees that the following requirements, procedures and provisions of the Registry Agreement (including the documents incorporated by reference therein) may be modified and amended by ICANN after the date hereof, without the consent of Registry Operator: i. Specification 6 – Registry Interoperability and Continuity Specifications; ii. Trademark Clearinghouse Requirements (§ 1 of Specification 7 of the Registry Agreement); iii. Trademark Post-­‐Delegation Dispute Resolution Procedure (§ 2.a of Specification 7 of the Registry Agreement);