Interventions in medicine require multicenter clinical trialson a large rather than limited number of subjects from various genetic and cultural backgrounds. International guidelines to protect the rights and well-being of human subjects involved in clinical trialsarecriticizedforthe priority they place on Western cultural values. These discussions become manifest especially with regard to the content and methodology of the informed consent procedure. The ethical dilemma emerges from the argument that there are fundamental differences about the concept of respect for the autonomy of individuals in different cultures and religions. Some communities prioritize the consent of community leaders or the head of family – usually men – over the voluntary and free consent of the individual. The aim of this work is to discuss this ethical dilemma to determine a base for a consensus that satisfies the sensibilities of different cultures without damaging the rights and autonomy of human subjects.

The vast improvements in medical technology reviled the crucial role of social determinants of health for the etiology, prevalence and prognosis of diseases. This changed the content of the right to health concept from a demand of health services, to a claim of having access to all social determinants of health. Thus, the just allocation of scarce resources of health and social determinants of health became an issue of ethical theories. John Rawls developed a theory of justice. His theory suggests that the principles of justice should be determined by individuals in a hypothetic initial position. In the initial position, individuals agree on principles of justice. Rawls puts forth that the institutions of the society should be structured in compliance with these principles to reach a fair social system. Although Rawls did not justify right to health in his theory, the efforts to enlarge the theory to cover right to health flourished quite fast. In this paper first the basic components of Rawls theory is explained. Then the most outstanding approaches to enlarge his theory to cover right to health is introduced and discussed within the discourse of Rawls theory of justice.

Haly Abbas was one of the pioneering physicians and surgeons of the Eastern world in the 10th century who influenced the Western world by his monumental work, The Royal Book. The book was first partly translated into Latin by Constantinus Africanus in the 11th century without citing the author's name. Haly Abbas was recognized in Europe after full translation of The Royal Book by Stephen of Antioch in 1127. The Royal Book has been accepted as an early source of jerrah-names (surgical books) in the Eastern world. The chapters regarding cranial fractures in Haly Abbas' work include unique management strategies for his period with essential quotations from Paul of Aegina's work Epitome. Both authors preferred free bone flap craniotomy in cranial fractures. Although Paul of Aegina, a Byzantine physician and surgeon, was a connection between ancient traditions and Islamic interpretation, Haly Abbas seemed to play a bridging role between the Roman-Byzantine and the School of Salerno in Europe.