3 ms·
Yes, it would be wrong because you don't have informed consent and you cannot really prove your assertion that compliance would be higher if adverse information
by raxxorrax 5y ago
Yes, it would be wrong because you don't have informed consent and you cannot really prove your assertion that compliance would be higher if adverse information did not get suppressed. In fact I think this had a negative influence on overall compliance for those that became aware of any framing. Neglecting the severe trust issues some have in official channels, this can even mean an overall bad outcome for health if you do not play with open cards.
I agree with your assertion about the medical industry otherwise. Still, dynamics of vaccines propose that their customers buy a minimum amount of dosages for the venture to be profitable. You create countless incentives to apply as much of them as possible and medical reasons slip into the background.
- dekhn 5y agoinformed consent is for health trials, not approved medical products.