Even though dr. olivieri later admitted that she should have never signed the agreement with apotex that included a confidentiality clause, does the fact that she did sign it have any bearing on her actions here? why or why not?

answer is given below

Explanation:

This fact credits Oliveri with having learned from a negative experience with a secret experience. However, it violates the rule that the first example is to judge what happens to patients. A trial test may not know all the information about it but it should inform the patient about the effect. The second example is unclear whether this was a clear violation, as she did not mention the date when she told Apotex that she wanted to publish her findings. The motive in this case may be questionable, she may ask others to help her and her patients. But she wanted to publish her results for her "glory."

Sometimes but itt depends, their is a lot if drugs on campus too so you really can't just say that