Full Answer Section

However, the trial also resulted in the development of a less expensive AZT treatment that could be more widely used in poorer countries. This could have a significant positive impact on the health of many people, and it could prevent many babies from being infected with HIV.

An act-utilitarian would weigh the harm caused to the babies in the placebo group against the potential good that could be done by developing a less expensive AZT treatment. If the act-utilitarian believed that the potential good outweighed the harm, then they would likely conclude that the clinical trial was justified.

However, it is important to note that there are other ethical frameworks that could be used to assess the clinical trial. For example, a deontologist might argue that it is always wrong to withhold an effective treatment from a patient, even if it means that the trial will not be as effective.

Ultimately, the ethical assessment of the clinical trial is a complex issue that depends on the specific ethical framework that is used.