You're a little quick to call things ethical -- in this article's case, the patient's doctors established that she had a fungal infection that was resistant to

You're a little quick to call things ethical -- in this article's case, the patient's doctors established that she had a fungal infection that was resistant to the treatments they had tried, then told her she would die soon and to prepare for it. What would be unethical about instead offering an experimental antifungal treatment that had not been clinically tested or verified? When you have a fast-acting terminal disease and are capable of participating in informed consent, seriously, what's the worst that can happen?