Yann04
Senior Member (Voting Rights)
maybe see it more as a cost benefit analysis. When does the probability and weight of risk outweigh that of reward. I've been in periods where I was thinking if I stay this bad for another 3 months I don't want yo live anymore. Imagine in a case like that I think it would be ethically dubious to withold a drug with stunning results in a Double Blinded Phase 2 RCT. Of course, bureaucratic and institutional rules mean that sort of sceenario is basically impossible unless you're rich and paying for a drug at a private clinic.We can’t gamble with dangerous drugs just because there is a chance that it might work.
Who should take responsibility if it goes wrong and people get worse or die?
Who should cover the resources for proven treatments that other sick people are deprived of because we used a limited healthcare budget on experimental and unproven treatments?
Everyone wants treatments as soon as possible. But there are many very good reasons that we do trials first.
The most loogical thing of course (Imagining the data from this and the phase 2 RCT hold up) is to have an accelerated phase 3 trial with emergency drug approval for ME once the results come out if they are positive.
But of course, we are still far from any of this. in such a small sample, the HLA differences could be randomness. We haven't even had a Controlled and Blinded trial yet. etc