Visit the Ironworks Gaming Website Email the Webmaster Graphics Library Rules and Regulations Help Support Ironworks Forum with a Donation to Keep us Online - We rely totally on Donations from members Donation goal Meter

Ironworks Gaming Radio

Ironworks Gaming Forum

Go Back   Ironworks Gaming Forum > Ironworks Gaming Forums > General Discussion > General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005)

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 05-07-2003, 08:28 PM   #11
LordKathen
Ma'at - Goddess of Truth & Justice
 

Join Date: September 15, 2002
Location: Kennewick, WA
Age: 51
Posts: 3,166
Quote:
Originally posted by MagiK:
Remember everyone that I am talking hoplessly terminal patients here....guarenteed death in the near future with no treatment.
I would say that it should be left up to the family. There is a variable here called faith. There has been some remarkable "miracles" in the past with people getting better "out of the blue" that were otherwise left for dead. Many would argue their faith was at work. This is not my view point on these "miracles". I think it's just random remission under cicumstances beyond our current knowledge. My point is, there is no guarenteed death untill their dead.
__________________
LordKathen is offline  
Old 05-07-2003, 08:32 PM   #12
Charean
Hathor
 

Join Date: March 6, 2001
Location: Waxahachie, TX
Age: 59
Posts: 2,201
Magik - indeed and interesting question.

Frankly, I have no problem with this concept, except wouldn't the illness that is causing the death skew results?

Just a thought.

I have never been against responsible decision making.

Then again, I am also for euthanasia. I watched my father die of cancer and it wasn't pretty.

[ 05-07-2003, 08:34 PM: Message edited by: Charean ]
__________________
And then there were 6.
Charean is offline  
Old 05-08-2003, 03:27 AM   #13
Aelia Jusa
Iron Throne Cult
 
Tetris Champion
Join Date: August 23, 2001
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Age: 42
Posts: 4,867
Quote:
Originally posted by MagiK:
Remember everyone that I am talking hoplessly terminal patients here....guarenteed death in the near future with no treatment.
Yes but that doesn't mean that them trialling an untested drug or treatment cannot lead to relatively worse outcomes for them according to them. Suppose the treatment does increase their life expectancy, but at the same time the side effects cause paralyzation or brain damage or excruciating pain that they did not have before and would not have had but for the treatment. If those potential side effects or the likelihood of them occuring had not been fully explained or concealed from the patients when they 'volunteered' then whether or not they're probably going to die next week without the treatment isn't the issue IMHO - what is is whether they would have still agreed to undertake the drug/treatment if they had been made aware of the risks. I think unless there are specific and unambiguous guidelines as to how patients are informed about the treatments then I am opposed to the practice.

I think it's still a case of volunteering, or at least, informed agreement, Willow, even if as you say, the side effects aren't known and the option to try the experimental treatment is a last resort. People would still have the option to not do it, but unless they are sufficiently counselled about the potential consequences then their options are not fully informed. It's not even an issue of legality for me, but ethicality - I think it's morally wrong to mislead or deceive people from a position of authority.

What about if the person is incapable of making the decision themselves? Should their family members be able to make the decision for them?
__________________
Aelia Jusa is offline  
Old 05-08-2003, 06:00 AM   #14
WillowIX
Apophis
 

Join Date: July 10, 2001
Location: By a big blue lake, Canada
Age: 49
Posts: 4,628
Quote:
Originally posted by MagiK:
Remember everyone that I am talking hoplessly terminal patients here....guarenteed death in the near future with no treatment.
I wholeheartedly agree with Aelia's post above. Event theough you are talking about "hopelessly terminal patients", trying a drug that has not been through the first phases of testing isnīt sound medical advice. First, you do not know the drug works. In theory it might sound good but does it really work? I have seen many bery good medicines in theory that does not work in vivo. Second, you will see the if there is a frequent side effect and you will be able to judge this against the positive effect. What you can skip is extensive clinical trials, that would save a year or two at least. "All" you get from those trials is the proper dose for different patients and of course extensive information about side effects. [img]smile.gif[/img] So my answer is still YES if the drug has gone through the first phase of testing.

Aelia, what I meant about volunteering is that it is often not the patient that decides, itīs his/hers relatives. Thus the patient has no say and cannot be called a volunteer per se.
WillowIX is offline  
Old 05-08-2003, 08:11 AM   #15
MagiK
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally posted by LordKathen:
quote:
Originally posted by MagiK:
Remember everyone that I am talking hoplessly terminal patients here....guarenteed death in the near future with no treatment.
I would say that it should be left up to the family. There is a variable here called faith. There has been some remarkable "miracles" in the past with people getting better "out of the blue" that were otherwise left for dead. Many would argue their faith was at work. This is not my view point on these "miracles". I think it's just random remission under cicumstances beyond our current knowledge. My point is, there is no guarenteed death untill their dead. [/QUOTE]LK those rare miracles are just that...RARE. They don't happen often and when they do, they get a lot of press. If you have an N Stage Lymphoma you are toast for all intents and purposes...and there are not many people who survive an unchecked brain tumor....or Bone cancer.....Faith is good, but there is also the theory "God helps those who help themselves".
 
Old 05-08-2003, 08:16 AM   #16
MagiK
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Some people say that if you are terminally ill you are not fit to make decisions abotu your own health care. Seems they consider you to be under undue stress. Personally I say BS to that. Unless you are insensate or in a coma you should be the determing choice about treatment. And yes I think doctors would have an ethical obligation to explain about untested medicines.

Willow, Im not saying to just randomly pick substances to see what they do...yes there would have had to have been some preliminary testing to see if the substance or treatment were applicable to the disease in question. [img]smile.gif[/img]
 
Old 05-08-2003, 10:31 AM   #17
WillowIX
Apophis
 

Join Date: July 10, 2001
Location: By a big blue lake, Canada
Age: 49
Posts: 4,628
Quote:
Originally posted by MagiK:
Willow, Im not saying to just randomly pick substances to see what they do...yes there would have had to have been some preliminary testing to see if the substance or treatment were applicable to the disease in question. [img]smile.gif[/img]
I know youīre not saying that MagiK. It was my argument. I donīt know if any completely untried substances have ever been used. Perhaps some genetic therapy. [img]smile.gif[/img]
WillowIX is offline  
Old 05-08-2003, 11:09 AM   #18
Harkoliar
Jack Burton
 

Join Date: March 21, 2001
Location: Philippines, but now Harbor City Sydney
Age: 40
Posts: 5,556
Quote:
Should terminally ill patients be allowed to volunteer for high risk experimental medicnes or treatments even if animal testing hasn't been complete or the FDA or AMA has not approved the procedure or medicine for humans?
if volunteer with no other hope of survival- yes
if diagnosed with insanity - no
if against its will - no

the abuses of this kind of medical experimentation.. there may be a mad scientist or bio-terror biologist that would "coerce" people to be guinea pigs in turn would look like "voluteers" but actually not. who knows?
__________________

Catch me if you can..
Harkoliar is offline  
Old 05-08-2003, 11:13 AM   #19
WillowIX
Apophis
 

Join Date: July 10, 2001
Location: By a big blue lake, Canada
Age: 49
Posts: 4,628
Quote:
Originally posted by Harkoliar:
if volunteer with no other hope of survival- yes
if diagnosed with insanity - no
if against its will - no

the abuses of this kind of medical experimentation.. there may be a mad scientist or bio-terror biologist that would "coerce" people to be guinea pigs in turn would look like "voluteers" but actually not. who knows?
Highly unlikely and a little too movie inspired. A scientist will never be in the postion to supply the drugs to the patient. Thatīs what doctors are for, and doctors will never be in a position to develop the drugs. BTW "its"?!! [img]tongue.gif[/img]
WillowIX is offline  
 


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Question for medical people Sir Degrader General Discussion 9 06-10-2005 03:18 PM
Medical Investigation Larry_OHF Entertainment (Movies, TV Shows and Books/Comics) 2 10-28-2004 04:51 AM
Medical help needed! Stratos General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005) 17 08-19-2003 08:39 AM
A new medical dictionary.... Garnet FalconDance General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005) 3 01-27-2002 09:28 PM
My friend (a medical student) is the best!!!!!!!! Larry_OHF General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005) 4 12-02-2001 07:55 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:49 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Đ2024 Ironworks Gaming & Đ2024 The Great Escape Studios TM - All Rights Reserved