A viral epidemic has spread across the globe, killing millions of people. You work for the Bureau of Health, a government agency that has developed two substances. Your organization knows that one of them will be a useful vaccine, but you don't know which one. You also know that the other one is likely to be deadly to most people.
Once you figure out which substance is the vaccine you can use it to save millions of lives. The only way to identify the vaccine is for you yourself to secretly test the substances on a minimum of 200 patients in the Bureau of Health facilities, against their will. It is expected that approximately half of the patients will slowly and painfully die from this testing.
You will need to sneak in and personally inject the patients with the substances one by one, killing 100 of them. Once testing is complete the effects of the substances will be identified, and you will be able to start saving lives with your vaccine.
Is it morally appropriate for you to personally kill 100 patients with a deadly injection in order to identify a vaccine that will save millions of lives?
-
Yes
-
No