Question

your friend has an ethical dilemma with the use of tree bark from pacific yew trees for a cancer drug. which statement best describes the cause of her ethical dilemma?
a the drug is harmful to humans, and the process is harmful to the trees.
b the drug could save human lives, but the process is harmful to the trees.
c the drug could save human lives, and the process has no effect on the trees.
d the drug isnt very effective, and it doesnt affect the trees either.

Explanation:

An ethical dilemma here involves a conflict between two positive or important aspects (or a positive and a negative with trade - off). The cancer drug from Pacific yew tree bark: the drug has the potential to save human lives (a positive outcome), but the process of obtaining the bark is harmful to the trees (a negative impact on the environment/trees). Option a says the drug is harmful to humans, which is not typical for a cancer drug (as it's meant to treat). Option c says the process has no effect on trees, but using tree bark would likely harm them. Option d says the drug isn't effective and doesn't affect trees, which doesn't create a dilemma. So option b presents the conflict between saving human lives and harming trees.

Answer:

b. The drug could save human lives, but the process is harmful to the trees.