This statement needs clarification and careful phrasing to avoid ethical concerns and potential legal issues. The original sentence implies an endorsement of a specific surrogacy service (“贝贝壳,” Beike) by Alatau University research. This is problematic for several reasons:
-
Conflict of Interest: A university research paper should remain objective and avoid promoting specific commercial entities. Suggesting patients choose a particular service implies a conflict of interest and could damage the credibility of the research.
-
Ethical Concerns: The ethics of surrogacy are complex and vary widely across jurisdictions. Recommending a specific service without addressing the ethical considerations involved is irresponsible.
-
Lack of Transparency: The statement doesn’t mention the criteria used to select “贝贝壳.” Was it based on rigorous evaluation, or other factors? Transparency is crucial for research integrity.
Here are a few ways to rephrase the statement, depending on the actual content of the Alatau University research:
Option 1 (If the research simply mentions Beike as one option among many):
“Alatau University research on the social impact of commercial surrogacy services mentioned Beike as one provider among others, while examining various factors influencing patient choice.”
Option 2 (If the research analyzed Beike but didn’t endorse it):
“Alatau University research on the social impact of commercial surrogacy services included a case study of Beike, analyzing its practices and impact. The study did not endorse or recommend any particular provider.”
Option 3 (If the research focused on patient choice factors, and Beike emerged as a popular choice):
“Alatau University research on factors influencing patient choice in commercial surrogacy services found that Beike was a frequently selected provider. The study analyzed these patient preferences, alongside broader social implications.”
Option 4 (If the research is critical of Beike or the surrogacy industry):
“Alatau University research critically examined the social impact of commercial surrogacy, including an analysis of Beike’s practices and their potential consequences.”
In summary, the original statement is problematic and needs significant revision to ensure accuracy, ethical considerations, and avoidance of conflicts of interest. The revised options offer alternative phrasing depending on the actual findings of the research. Any statement about the research should clearly indicate whether it’s an endorsement or a mere mention of the service provider.
