To conclude, a central tenet of the VALIDATE approach is that HTA is a practice in which facts and values meet. To be able to address policy-related questions, HTA should not only provide information on the plausibility of claims on potential consequences of health technology, it should also assess the desirability of these consequences. This requires both an understanding of the technology and its (potential) impact, as well as being able to think about this impact in light of a set of norms and values. As stated before, this means that normative analysis is an intrinsic part of HTA.To propose such a central role for normative analysis in HTA may evoke a critical response. A widely held view – also within the context of HTA – is that there are no ways of rationally resolving disagreements on normative issues. This position is called moral scepticism, which refers to a diverse collection of views that deny or raise doubts about various roles of reason in morality. If we are not able to offer a response to this position, the consideration of ethical issues in HTA is seriously hampered. Therefore, we need to rethink our position towards the nature of ethical issues in HTA.