While I agree that the author is being a little facetious (with the constant Nazi references and such), I don't think he is arguing in favor of removing ethical considerations in research, or even arbitrarily weakening the constraints put on scientific studies.
But what purpose is having a review board made up of people who can think for themselves if their behavior is going to be indistinguishable from a program running through a checklist without any care whatsoever for whether or not the checklist makes sense in that context?
Massive inefficiencies in bureaucracy are always hidden behind the fig leaf of consistency and accountability, but it's worthwhile to consider what aim they serve and at what cost.
But what purpose is having a review board made up of people who can think for themselves if their behavior is going to be indistinguishable from a program running through a checklist without any care whatsoever for whether or not the checklist makes sense in that context?
Massive inefficiencies in bureaucracy are always hidden behind the fig leaf of consistency and accountability, but it's worthwhile to consider what aim they serve and at what cost.