1. Syphilis is a venereal disease that spreads during sexual intercourse. 2. That is was usually contracted by poor, African Americans, whom had terrible sanitation issues. 3. One major purpose was to integrate African Americans and white people through the study. There were brief arguments about the racial issue. 4. They were now looking for the progression of syphilis in African American males. 5. The results weren’t really adequate they only were that syphilis in white and black people were different (they didn’t take into consideration the poverty of one group versus another). Their reasoning for using black people was that there were a larger number of them with documented cases of syphilis.

1. The men got a formal diagnosis and some form of treatment. 2. Many of them were only given partial treatment which allowed the virus to adapt to the medication, leaving them incurable. 3. No they were poor an uneducated they wouldn’t have known the reasoning. 4. Yes they could have shown some compassion and humanitarian aid to their fellow man. Instead of leaving them after making the disease stronger.

1. The people who had more documented cases of syphilis were poor African americans whom had never been to a doctor. Many black people has no access to clean water, plumbing, sanitation, medication, and/or good paying jobs. It is obvious that their results couldn’t compare to white people who had access to all of these ‘luxuries’. 2. Because 82 percent of the residents were African American and were at risk of contracting or having syphilis. 3. Oslo and Tuskgegee looked at old cases and took into consideration the poverty level and its relation to the number of sick people. 4. Yes, they didn’t complete any of the patients therapies or treatments they only began treating them for the