health of detainees.565 They should pay particular attention to the mental and physical health of detainees undergoing punishment.566 267. Finally, detainees “should not be subjected to any medical or scientific experimentation that may be detrimental to their health”.567 The Human Rights Committee has concluded, for example, that the treatment of a detainee, which included psychiatric experiments and tranquilizer injections against his will, amounted to inhuman treatment prohibited by Article 7 of the ICCPR.568 In 2006, it also specified that “when there is doubt as to the ability of a person or a category of persons to give [their free] consent, e.g. prisoners, the only experimental treatment compatible with Article 7 would be treatment chosen as the most appropriate to meet the medical needs of the individual”.569 268. International humanitarian law also guarantees the right of persons deprived of their liberty to adequate medical attention and healthy living conditions. These rules can be found in specific provisions of the Third and Fourth Geneva Conventions, among others.570 Additionally, customary international humanitarian law provides for the treatment and care of the wounded and sick and prohibits medical experimentation or any other medical procedure that is not indicated by a person’s state of health.571 b. Domestic Standards 269. The Eighth Amendment to the US Constitution has been interpreted as guaranteeing detainees’ access to adequate medical care.572 Inadequate care is found where prison officials had knowledge of and disregarded a substantial risk to a detainee’s health. Examples include “serious denials or delay in access to medical personnel; a denial of access to appropriately qualified health care personnel; [and] a failure to inquire into facts necessary to make a professional judgment”.573 Additionally, detainees have a right to be 565 “Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners”, op. cit., note 280, Rule 25. UN Special Rapporteur on torture, Interim report to the General Assembly, A/68/295, op. cit., note 304, para. 56. 567 UN HRC, General Comment No. 20, op. cit., note 282, para. 7. Article 7 of the ICCPR prohibits medical experiments without the free consent of the person concerned. 568 UN Special Rapporteur on torture, Interim report to the General Assembly, A/63/175, op. cit., note 307, para. 63; UN HRC, Antonio Viana Acosta v. Uruguay, Communication No. 110/1981, 29 March 1984, para. 15, <http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/undocs/session39/110-1981.htm>. 569 UN HRC, Concluding observations, United States of America, CCPR/C/USA/CO/3/Rev.1, 18 December 2006, para. 31, <http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/133837.pdf>. 570 See, for instance, Third Geneva Convention, Arts. 25, 30-31; Fourth Geneva Convention, Arts. 76, 85, 91-92. See, also, APII, Art. 5. 571 “Customary International Humanitarian Law, Rule 110: Treatment and Care of the Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked”, ICRC website, <http://www.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v1_rul_rule110>; “Customary International Humanitarian Law, Rule 92: Mutilation and Medical, Scientific or Biological Experiments”, ICRC website, <http://www.icrc.org/customaryihl/eng/docs/v1_rul_rule92>. 572 See, for instance, United States Supreme Court, Estelle v. Gamble, Case No. 75-929, 30 November 1976, <http://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/429/97>; United States Supreme Court, Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Governor of California, et al. v. Marciano Plata, Case No. 09-1233, 23 May 2011, <http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/091233.ZO.html>. 573 “Know your rights - Medical, dental and mental health care”, American Civil Liberties Union website, <https://www.aclu.org/files/assets/know_your_rights_--_medical_mental_health_and_dental_july_2012.pdf>, referring to United States Supreme Court , Estelle v. Gamble, ibid.; United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, Lance Jett v. M. Penner, D. Peterson, and Cheryl K. Pliler Warden, Case No. 04-15882, 9 March 2006, <http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-9thcircuit/1000528.html> (delay of over a year before seeing a hand specialist); United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit, 566 116