I could imagine that in practice you end up with a bunch of vulnerable people submitting themselves to experimentation by powerful companies, which is an unhealthy dynamic.
I agree that it could be an unhealthy dynamic but who should ultimately have the power to make that decision? The patient who wants to participate in a trial because it may offer a chance of improving his quality of life, or us?
Beyond that, allowing for these experimental trials, regardless of their success or failure, can accelerate medical progress that can enable better care for many more people in the future.
That's what I see a lot with Cancer drugs. People are dying and want to take a chance on really experimental stuff but the FDA will deny it. They want to try it because it could help them, or if not, at least help others by eliminating useless paths.
It's so strange that people feel it's wrong for patients to make their own choice on this, but they are okay forcing others to not have treatment. It's a "My decision is better than yours, I can decide what is better for you.
Agreed. People should have a strong right to repair that gives them liberty over hardware and software in their property especially in their body. Anti-cirumvention ought be illegal by default. The law should protect people from being prayed up on by controlling interests. Would that.
Hammershaft|1 year ago
Beyond that, allowing for these experimental trials, regardless of their success or failure, can accelerate medical progress that can enable better care for many more people in the future.
DoesntMatter22|1 year ago
It's so strange that people feel it's wrong for patients to make their own choice on this, but they are okay forcing others to not have treatment. It's a "My decision is better than yours, I can decide what is better for you.
jauntywundrkind|1 year ago
op00to|1 year ago