6 ms·

>“If I can help people suffering from herpes, isn’t it my duty to do so?” Gosh I here that statement echoing in my head about the problems in my life... Also,

>“If I can help people suffering from herpes, isn’t it my duty to do so?” Gosh I here that statement echoing in my head about the problems in my life... Also, this is exactly the kind of problem in healthcare that is completely government and establishment driven. Physicians keep propping their monopoly up with literally hundreds of millions of dollars in lobbying/bribery. Every profession in medical seems to be similar, dumping massive money into politicians: https://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/top.php?indexType=s https://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/top.php?indexType=s Then their 'scientific method' has completely let me down after reading what these 'experts' consider a study. Lots of hypothesis getting validated by any-means-necessary. Not to mention their understanding of statistics usually tosses in the word 'P-value' for extra points, despite their population sample and study being a terrible representation of outcomes. Medical is corrupt AF

ThomPete 8y ago
But what are you going to do about it?
gvb 8y ago
>“If I can help people suffering from herpes, isn’t it my duty to do so?” That is a question, not a statement "Since I can help...". The problem is that he did significant harm to people trying to answer that question. The results of his experimentation are not fully realized, but the story indicates his injections caused harm in some cases and do not appear to have achieved the promise cure in any(?) of the cases. The counterbalance question is "If my hypothesis is wrong and I harm people, isn't it my duty to do no harm?"
techterrier 8y ago
>“If I can help people suffering from herpes, isn’t it my duty to do so?” He missed out the 'first do no harm' bit. It's quite important.
- Afforess 8y ago
  "First, do no harm" is not part of the hippocratic oath at all. [1] The actual line in the hippocratic oath is much more flexible: >I will follow that system of regimen which, according to my ability and judgment, I consider for the benefit of my patients, and abstain from whatever is deleterious and mischievous. Based on the reported specifics of the rogue vaccine trial, it would seem Halford did most of this. The article questions his judgement over the confusion between HSV-1 and HSV-2 strains, but that seems the most notable lapse. The picture painted is of a scientist trying to cure a disease in spite of obstacles - not disrupt the system or intentionally cause harm. [1] https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/first-do-no-harm-201510138421 https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/first-do-no-harm-2015101...

ThomPete 8y ago

But what are you going to do about it?

gvb 8y ago

>“If I can help people suffering from herpes, isn’t it my duty to do so?” That is a question, not a statement "Since I can help...". The problem is that he did significant harm to people trying to answer that question. The results of his experimentation are not fully realized, but the story indicates his injections caused harm in some cases and do not appear to have achieved the promise cure in any(?) of the cases. The counterbalance question is "If my hypothesis is wrong and I harm people, isn't it my duty to do no harm?"

techterrier 8y ago

>“If I can help people suffering from herpes, isn’t it my duty to do so?” He missed out the 'first do no harm' bit. It's quite important.

Afforess 8y ago
"First, do no harm" is not part of the hippocratic oath at all. [1] The actual line in the hippocratic oath is much more flexible: >I will follow that system of regimen which, according to my ability and judgment, I consider for the benefit of my patients, and abstain from whatever is deleterious and mischievous. Based on the reported specifics of the rogue vaccine trial, it would seem Halford did most of this. The article questions his judgement over the confusion between HSV-1 and HSV-2 strains, but that seems the most notable lapse. The picture painted is of a scientist trying to cure a disease in spite of obstacles - not disrupt the system or intentionally cause harm. [1] https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/first-do-no-harm-201510138421 https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/first-do-no-harm-2015101...