Star Trek: Voyager, "Nothing Human"
From Anna Kaplan's summary at note 1 above (Cinefantastique 31.11 [April 2000]: 37). Damaged ship found with dying alien who takes over B'Elanna. "The Doctor can't separate them. He and Harry Kim make a hologram based on a real exobiologist named Crell Moset, a Cardassian. His database contains the expertise needed to save B'Elanna. Moset is recognized by a Bajoran crewman [...] who says that Moset was a mass murderer who obtained his data by experimenting on Bajorans."
Relevant here for the Moset hologram and its database. We'll also note:
Providing conflict in the plot is the ethical issue of using (to save lives and do good) medical data derived through great evil. This issue was of some interest after a 1972 exposé of the “Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis in the Negro Male” in the 1930s: in that case "the 'results [were] disproportionately meager compared with known risks to human subjects involved'” — but what if the study had produced useful results? Similarly with Nazi medical experiments, perhaps especially those "to determine the maximum altitude from which crews of damaged aircraft could parachute to safety[..., where scientists] also carried out so-called freezing experiments on prisoners to find an effective treatment for hypothermia." If those atrocities had produced data that could help save the lives of fliers, should those data be used? More tangential, there is the scene in 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY where Dave Bowman re-enters his spaceship Discovery without his helmet, and at the New York City premiere of the movie, there was a handout on each seat explaining that the SF convention that such unprotected exposure to space was quickly deadly — was wrong. If Kubrick and Clarke had learned that fact from the Nazi experiments, how should we judge their use of it?
RDE, finishing 8Jul22