4 ms·

That's fair, I guess, but say there were some way for me to sign a contract saying they could test on me should I become afflicted Alzheimer's? Wouldn't there b

by 0xEF 1y ago

That's fair, I guess, but say there were some way for me to sign a contract saying they could test on me should I become afflicted Alzheimer's? Wouldn't there be some sort of legal protection for them, then? Because I'd happily do it. I've watched multiple family members suffer from some form of severe mental decline and it is horrifying enough to make me willing to sacrifice myself if there is even a sliver of a chance that my sacrifice will help future generations avoid that pain. And since we're all nerds here, we all know that if we want to know if a thing actually works the way we want it to, we have to test it repeatedly in its working environment.

dpark 1y ago
> Wouldn't there be some sort of legal protection for them, then? Not really, no. A company that unleashed unproven drugs in a vulnerable human population would be sued into oblivion. They would lose in court over and over as judges and juries decided that no, you cannot in fact sign away your right to not be subjected to criminal negligence. They would very likely be subjected to criminal prosecution as well. This (the lawsuits) happens all the time. People sign waivers, get hurt, and the courts decide that the level of negligence involved overrides the waiver. Happened a while back at a Jiu Jitsu gym. Someone signed all the waivers and got paralyzed and successfully sued for $46 million. The jury decided that the instructor was criminally negligent.
- samus 1y ago
  Things like these are sometimes done for experimental cancer therapies. Granted, the patients are going to die anyway, and the therapy has gone through most of the trials.
  - dpark 1y ago
    Right. They have gone through most of the trials already. That’s key. You can have a reasonably informed consent if you have some safety data. You can’t really have someone give informed consent about a totally untested drug.
    - adastra22 1y ago
      Sure you can. Why not? “I understand this is completely untested and might be poison. My mental competence has been tested and certified by a professional. Being in right mind and having all the pertinent information before me, I still want to inject myself with this. Signed, -Patient” Something is wrong with your definition of consent if it totally dismisses the patient’s autonomy and right to action.
      - dpark 1y ago
        Our laws don’t really work like that, at least not in the US. Neither criminal nor civil. This might be a shock, but you are generally not allowed to kill people. We have a whole range of laws that make it a crime for you to hurt or kill people. If you run an unregulated carnival ride and it falls apart and kills everyone, you’re going to prison. The fact that you have everyone sign a waiver that says “I know this might kill me” will not protect you from your own criminal negligence. Nor will it protect you from the lawsuits the families of the deceased will bring. In your scenario the person giving out untested medication that kills someone would almost certainly be found guilty of criminal negligence if not worse. Based on that same criminal negligence I imagine that the family would be successful in suing.
        adastra22 1y ago
        And yet we have SCUBA dive outfits and mountaineering shops that routinely sell equipment to adventurers, and provide guided services that sometimes do result in deaths. It is not nearly as black and white as you are portraying. What these all have in common is the notion of informed consent -- I can get PADI certified and then rent SCUBA equipment, and if I then die while cave diving, that is wholly on me not the dive shop operator. The critical test isn't that safety has been demonstrated, but that potential risks (known or unknown) have been disclosed and understood. I can go out and do risky things, if I want, under those conditions. And yet I am not allowed to make my own medicine, or to take a completely unproven medicine that might very well kill me, even if I am fully cognizant of the risks involved. The rules regarding medicine and drugs really are different from how we handle other risks in our society. I am saying it shouldn't be that way.

by 0xEF 1y ago

dpark 1y ago

> Wouldn't there be some sort of legal protection for them, then? Not really, no. A company that unleashed unproven drugs in a vulnerable human population would be sued into oblivion. They would lose in court over and over as judges and juries decided that no, you cannot in fact sign away your right to not be subjected to criminal negligence. They would very likely be subjected to criminal prosecution as well. This (the lawsuits) happens all the time. People sign waivers, get hurt, and the courts decide that the level of negligence involved overrides the waiver. Happened a while back at a Jiu Jitsu gym. Someone signed all the waivers and got paralyzed and successfully sued for $46 million. The jury decided that the instructor was criminally negligent.

samus 1y ago
Things like these are sometimes done for experimental cancer therapies. Granted, the patients are going to die anyway, and the therapy has gone through most of the trials.
- dpark 1y ago
  Right. They have gone through most of the trials already. That’s key. You can have a reasonably informed consent if you have some safety data. You can’t really have someone give informed consent about a totally untested drug.
  - adastra22 1y ago
    Sure you can. Why not? “I understand this is completely untested and might be poison. My mental competence has been tested and certified by a professional. Being in right mind and having all the pertinent information before me, I still want to inject myself with this. Signed, -Patient” Something is wrong with your definition of consent if it totally dismisses the patient’s autonomy and right to action.
    - dpark 1y ago
      Our laws don’t really work like that, at least not in the US. Neither criminal nor civil. This might be a shock, but you are generally not allowed to kill people. We have a whole range of laws that make it a crime for you to hurt or kill people. If you run an unregulated carnival ride and it falls apart and kills everyone, you’re going to prison. The fact that you have everyone sign a waiver that says “I know this might kill me” will not protect you from your own criminal negligence. Nor will it protect you from the lawsuits the families of the deceased will bring. In your scenario the person giving out untested medication that kills someone would almost certainly be found guilty of criminal negligence if not worse. Based on that same criminal negligence I imagine that the family would be successful in suing.
      - adastra22 1y ago
        And yet we have SCUBA dive outfits and mountaineering shops that routinely sell equipment to adventurers, and provide guided services that sometimes do result in deaths. It is not nearly as black and white as you are portraying. What these all have in common is the notion of informed consent -- I can get PADI certified and then rent SCUBA equipment, and if I then die while cave diving, that is wholly on me not the dive shop operator. The critical test isn't that safety has been demonstrated, but that potential risks (known or unknown) have been disclosed and understood. I can go out and do risky things, if I want, under those conditions. And yet I am not allowed to make my own medicine, or to take a completely unproven medicine that might very well kill me, even if I am fully cognizant of the risks involved. The rules regarding medicine and drugs really are different from how we handle other risks in our society. I am saying it shouldn't be that way.