Bt1 5,213 Posted April 8, 2020 Share Posted April 8, 2020 2 minutes ago, justhislife said: I'm not understanding your first part there, would you mind clarifying? And yes, tests are going to be needed to test drug efficiency. However, it is illegal to have patients participate without their consent, at least in the U.S. Right now, there are 3 treatments : 1. Antivirals, known drugs for the flu 2. This drug praised by Trump 3. Some drugs used for HIV. there are some reports that x patient wanted the treatment 2 and the doctor didnt want to give it to him, even if the initial treatment didnt work for him. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
uo111 5,285 Posted April 8, 2020 Share Posted April 8, 2020 I don’t think he clung to this drug for financial gain, I think he did it for political gain. Doesn’t matter if it works as long as people think it does and thinks he is bringing it to them. That being said, I hope this blows up because **** him Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
uo111 5,285 Posted April 8, 2020 Share Posted April 8, 2020 49 minutes ago, Florin said: Not to my knowledge. But there are reports of little flexibility of changing treatment even if it didnt work for that person. There are stories that people in x hospital only gave x treatment and so on. The discussion started from the fact that there isnt a confirmation of this drug efficiency. And I pointed out that for that you need tests, including with placebos. You don’t need placebos for a drug intended to treat and infectious disease. You just need controls. Placebo’s would not be remotely ethical. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bt1 5,213 Posted April 8, 2020 Share Posted April 8, 2020 5 minutes ago, uo111 said: You don’t need placebos for a drug intended to treat and infectious disease. You just need controls. Placebo’s would not be remotely ethical. From what I've read in one of the two studies considered to small, a part of the group didnt receive the drug. It is unclear if those people received any other treatment. Cant find something more clear about it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsleepOnTheCeiling 7,000 Posted April 8, 2020 Share Posted April 8, 2020 18 minutes ago, Florin said: Right now, there are 3 treatments : 1. Antivirals, known drugs for the flu 2. This drug praised by Trump 3. Some drugs used for HIV. there are some reports that x patient wanted the treatment 2 and the doctor didnt want to give it to him, even if the initial treatment didnt work for him. My opinion on this is that the FDA approves drugs to be used for the virus. If the doctor were to give the patient a drug and that patient reacts badly to said drug, the doctor will be liable. While the doctor might have authorized the first treatment without FDA approval for that use, they are allowed to use their professional judgement to some extent in order to make that decision. And the first drug could have less side effects than the second. Also, a doctor has to consider interactions from the first drug and the second drug. And even if the patient didn't receive the first drug and just the second, the doctor has to also take into account the patient's medical history. There is a lot more at play than just the patient wanting a certain treatment plan. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bt1 5,213 Posted April 8, 2020 Share Posted April 8, 2020 9 minutes ago, justhislife said: My opinion on this is that the FDA approves drugs to be used for the virus. If the doctor were to give the patient a drug and that patient reacts badly to said drug, the doctor will be liable. While the doctor might have authorized the first treatment without FDA approval for that use, they are allowed to use their professional judgement to some extent in order to make that decision. And the first drug could have less side effects than the second. Also, a doctor has to consider interactions from the first drug and the second drug. And even if the patient didn't receive the first drug and just the second, the doctor has to also take into account the patient's medical history. There is a lot more at play than just the patient wanting a certain treatment plan. That's the problem. FDA didnt approve anything yet for covid and wont do it without tests. That's kinda the story here. Patients need the treatment now, not 6 months from now and who gets first treatment and not the second one is more about luck. And doctors refusing to give the other treatment doesnt have anything to do with patient history. It has to do with the fact that in that location someone decided to use the first treatment. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fangwares 50 Posted April 8, 2020 Share Posted April 8, 2020 As long as we get a Cure I don’t care Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woolfsmck 2,763 Posted April 8, 2020 Author Share Posted April 8, 2020 4 hours ago, Florin said: And you will be ok if someone you know will get a fake medicine and not a real medicine for covid? I dont get it. Clearly you dont get it. .. When the experts 'test' a new med. the placebo is meant to verify that they are on the right track or not... If patients receaving placebos get healthy...the med. in question may not be having the effect intended..... It's part of verifying whether a med. Is 'real' like a cat in a sil, I observe life, moving and still. My words give a clue,look inside to see whats true Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
vitoburrrito 653 Posted April 8, 2020 Share Posted April 8, 2020 Normally I’d say this is an issue but I think the bigger issue is that he’s just mishandled this whole thing and people are still defending him for some reason on the basis of “states rights” or “the WHO is corrupt”. ok...whatever Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woolfsmck 2,763 Posted April 8, 2020 Author Share Posted April 8, 2020 3 hours ago, uo111 said: You don’t need placebos for a drug intended to treat and infectious disease. You just need controls. Placebo’s would not be remotely ethical. Any FDA approved medication goes the numerous scientific 'testing' procedures before they will approve it. Trump saying his product works before the FDA completes its ratification process is the unethical part here... like a cat in a sil, I observe life, moving and still. My words give a clue,look inside to see whats true Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fangwares 50 Posted April 9, 2020 Share Posted April 9, 2020 Finding a cure for this should be top priority Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bt1 5,213 Posted April 9, 2020 Share Posted April 9, 2020 6 hours ago, Woolfsmck said: Clearly you dont get it. .. When the experts 'test' a new med. the placebo is meant to verify that they are on the right track or not... If patients receaving placebos get healthy...the med. in question may not be having the effect intended..... It's part of verifying whether a med. Is 'real' I understand. What you dont understand is that if the treatment is working, the others who get placebos risk their lifes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woolfsmck 2,763 Posted April 9, 2020 Author Share Posted April 9, 2020 4 hours ago, Florin said: I understand. What you dont understand is that if the treatment is working, the others who get placebos risk their lifes. Never mind. . testing procedures are best left to trained medical experts... like a cat in a sil, I observe life, moving and still. My words give a clue,look inside to see whats true Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Featured Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.