Posted on 09/06/2006 11:00:27 PM PDT by freepatriot32
The FDA is presently considering guidelines that would allow scientists to conduct "emergency research" on patients without any informed consent. PFLC is launching a direct challenge to these proposed regulations which would allow Nazi-like experimentation on human beings.
Do you remember from history what the Nazi party and Joseph Mengele did to human subjects during WWII? These reprobates conducted dangerous medical experiments on innocent people without consent. Many people died as a result of the Nazis' human experiments and many others suffered a lifetime of post-experimental trauma and injury. This is not to mention the deprivation of basic human dignity that is occasioned by unconsented experimentation on human beings. Your government is proposing to do the same thing in 2006 !!!
The Pro-Family Law Center has just discovered that the United States Food & Drug Administration (FDA) is considering new rules that would allow scientists and doctors to conduct "emergency research" on unconscious or other incapacitated patients. This "emergency research" could be conducted without any informed consent from the patient or their designated representative. The proposed regulations known as "Guidance for Institutional Review Boards, Clinical Investigators, and Sponsors; Exception from Informed Consent for Emergency Research" are set for public hearing on October 30, 2006. Most American citizens have no idea that this hearing is to take place. Moreover, most wouldn't know what to do about it.
However, PFLC is simply not willing to put up with the idea that the U.S. government can order that any human being be experimented on without valid consent. Our lead counsel and PFLC president, Rich Ackerman, has fought for the privacy rights of patients, informed consent rights, and other pro-life causes for over a decade.
PFLC considers this newest battle to be one of the most important of our times. If a human being can be experimented on with absolutely no consent, we have lost all sense of human dignity. While our Nation long ago lost much of its respect for preborn children, we attempted to hold on to the principles of informed consent and human dignity for adults. These new regulations would chip away at the remaining respect that our Nation has for human life.
This is disturbing. But it really did not need the hysterical Nazi rhetoric. I am getting tired of those sorts of comparisons which are rarely justified. It tends to give an otherwise interesting article something of the air of an hysterical rant. A lot of times I hit the word Nazi (or Communist) used as an adjective in a story and I just stop reading and move onto something else.
How is it disturbing? All it says is that if all else fails, you're dying, and something needs to be done *now*, doctors can use experimental techniques or gear on you to try to save your life. I find it comforting that if a friend or family member, or even myself is severely injured in a car accident, brought in unconscious and dying, and the doctor has an experimental drug that can save their life, he can in good conscience and without fear of malpractice suit adminster it. If you are dying already, and nothing else can save you, trying something, anything to save your life is worth it, IMHO. It's not like you have anything to lose at that point, and it's not like your situation is going to get *worse*.
How many times have we heard about people dying from accidents, only to later find out that there was some experimental treatment that they could have been given to save them *IN THAT SAME HOSPITAL*, but couldn't, because of consent laws and the fear of lawsuits? I can recall at least four incidents, personally.
You make good points. But there are people who may not want that sort of thing done for a variety of reasons. In some cases religious objections exist to certain forms of medical treatment. Also in some cases there could be side effects which might prove worse than death. Its a tough call. But I think consent needs to be gotten before going into experimental methods to save someone's life. Those who are share your concerns should carry some kind of card in their wallet that says you authorize any and all measures which might prolong your life.
Thanks for the info linked in your # 16.
There's also the synthetic blood that's been tested in limited areas. I don't recall the name of the blood replacement or the manufacturer, but I read about it here on FR, and the debate between FReepers went much as this thread is tending.
The issue with this experimental synthetic blood is that it is able to deliver oxygen through the bloodstream, whereas the fluid administered by EMTs before you reach the hospital can only replace volume of blood lost (preventing cardiac arrest) but the brain and other organs are still depleted of oxygen until blood typing/administration can take place.
That's this layman's understanding. YMMV
So, if you (or your significant other or loved one) were brought in on 9/11/01 as one of the WTC survivors, with burns so severe that your clothing was gone and you'd passed out from the pain and shock, your identity was unknown, and you were dying, you'd want the doctors to stand around and wait for you to be identified and for your next of kin or guardian to give permission before they stuffed you in a hyperbaric chamber to try to save your life. Or would you want them to stuff you in the chamber first to try to save your life and ask stupid questions later? I very much think the latter is the case here.
Hyperbaric chambers as immediate treatment for burns were an "investigative medical device" on 9/11/01. And no, it's not like an iron lung - after the treatment time was up, you are removed from the chamber.
That's pretty much the case for the currently used fluid in the field, yes, with the added proviso that it also can contain carbohydrates and other ingredients to try to ward off shock. It does not carry oxygen at all, and that's proven fatal every day in America - again, it's used because doing nothing will result in death, while this gives one a fighting chance.
The synthetic blood can carry oxygen and replace volume.
Thanks for the additional info on current fluid replacement. Still trying to locate the thread I mentioned previously...
FYI, the current "fluid replacement" used by EMS is either saline or D5W (or one of its decendants). D5W is a 5% dextrose in saline solution.
I could give hypothetical scenarios to the contrary point of view but I won't. Its really pointless. As I said this is a tough call. I acknowledge your point of view and your arguments hold water. But IMO no one should be subjected to experimental medical practices w/o some form of consent.
On a side note I know something about burns. And if a loved one of mine were brought in on 9/11 with the injuries you are describing which I am presuming mean 3rd degree burns over most of the body, as painful as it would be for me... I hope I would have the courage to let them go. I know someone who was burned very badly in a fire but not as badly as you are describing. His life has been hell on earth since then.
ping
Except that there are now many treatments (some experimental) that if performed within 24 hours of the burn occurring can actually regenerate the tissue and prevent the burn patient's life from becoming hell on earth. Seems that the hyperbaric chamber (to take one example) is highly effective in helping the body heal, even in the case of 3rd degree burns - but the patient must be installed in one as soon as possible and no later than 24 hours.
Believe it or not, the hyperbaric chamber has saved many lives, and those that recieve the treatment have minimal scarring, near miraculous recovery times, and usually go back to normal lives, thanks to the "oxy box."
"Letting someone go" through ignorance of the state of medical technology is stupid.
Negative - per the protocols above, the experiment has to be used in an attempt to save the dying patient's life, and can only be used for that purpose. So, no, this scenario would not be "legal" under the codes listed above. Life-saving only, not general research.
Thanks.
By the way, people used to say the exact same thing about people who stepped on rusty nails vice penicillin. We think that that would be stupid today, but the same argument is still alive, as you've just proven.
You might want to think about that.
Somehow I remembered Polyheme.
I think you are taking a rather narrow view of this. You are acting like there is no danger involved in experimental treatments. What about all the crazy drugs that have been discovered to have horrible side effects? You are also ignoring the rights of people who may have religious objections to not be subjected to this kind of thing. I repeat you have points that are valid. But there is more than one side to this.
Thank you, I was going nuts trying to find that thread!
Controversial blood trial continues (PolyHeme)
May 2006
http://www.the-scientist.com/news/display/23397/
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.