A portion of knowledge and advances in modern medicine are the result of experimentation on unwilling test subjects. These subjects suffered greatly and often died at the hands of experimenters who viewed them with absolute apathy, as no more than a means to an end.
While most of us condemn such behaviour and find it reprehensible, we don’t reject the medical knowledge obtained this way.
At a surface level, this might sound hypocritical. I don’t consider it to be so: acknowledging the value of the knowledge does not imply moral acceptance of the methods by which it was obtained.
Rejecting useful scientific or medical knowledge that was gathered through unethical means would extend the suffering to those who could benefit from it, but would not undo the harm already done. It would not bring peace to those who suffered for it, nor justice to those responsible for that suffering.
Instead, we accept and make use of the advances obtained at a heavy price, while still condemning the methods used to obtain them. We reject such behaviour in modern research and refuse funding or support to those who would perpetrate them. When it comes to experimenting on unwilling human subjects, the practice is rightly outlawed.
I believe this stance is not only sensible in critical fields like medicine, but also logical for fields like engineering and technology. We can condemn the means by which an organisation achieves its goals or how it gathers the resources and data necessary for its research, without rejecting the knowledge gained. However, it remains our responsibility to avoid funding or in any way supporting organisations that engage in such unethical practices. Knowledge may endure, but the methods used to obtain it must not.