- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 5/25/18 at 1:29 pm to the808bass
quote:The 10 commandments are principles taken from the very character of God. There is an active and passive side to each one. The active side of 6th commandment is that we should not unlawfully take life (murder). The passive side is to seek to preserve life.
There is no moral law that states “thou shalt take chemotherapy.”
If someone is bleeding out and there is a chance to stop the bleeding and save a life, we have the moral responsibility to do so. Likewise if someone is dying of cancer and we have the ability to administer medicine to save their life, we have the responsibility to do so.
Posted on 5/25/18 at 1:29 pm to udtiger
The bill does, however, attempt to incentivize manufacturers by acknowledging that Right To Try patients will be sicker, and thus any negative outcomes from allowing terminally ill patients to try therapies will not be included in the FDA’s decision-making for future approvals.
According to the new legislation, even an eligible investigational treatment must: (1) have successfully completed a phase 1 (initial, small scale) clinical trial; (2) remain under investigation in a clinical trial approved by the FDA; and (3) not be approved, licensed, or cleared for sale under the Federal Food, Drug, or Cosmetic Act or the Public Health Service Act. This is good news for those concerned about safety, but some argue the barriers are not enough.
The truth is that many individuals pursue the right to try because they have been unsuccessful in clinical trials. Further, traditional trials add not only years to the review process for therapies, but inevitably increase drug costs. Ongoing arguments suggest that if the clinical trial process in the U.S. were improved, the need for the Right To Try Act wouldn’t exist. However, others contend that the FDA trial process is necessarily rigorous and that any patient rights to skip clinical trials will undermine future trial enrollment.
LINK
According to the new legislation, even an eligible investigational treatment must: (1) have successfully completed a phase 1 (initial, small scale) clinical trial; (2) remain under investigation in a clinical trial approved by the FDA; and (3) not be approved, licensed, or cleared for sale under the Federal Food, Drug, or Cosmetic Act or the Public Health Service Act. This is good news for those concerned about safety, but some argue the barriers are not enough.
The truth is that many individuals pursue the right to try because they have been unsuccessful in clinical trials. Further, traditional trials add not only years to the review process for therapies, but inevitably increase drug costs. Ongoing arguments suggest that if the clinical trial process in the U.S. were improved, the need for the Right To Try Act wouldn’t exist. However, others contend that the FDA trial process is necessarily rigorous and that any patient rights to skip clinical trials will undermine future trial enrollment.
LINK
Posted on 5/25/18 at 1:29 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
Ironically the party for abortion and assisted suicide is against taking drugs that might kill terminally ill patients if it has the intent to save or help them. The party of death.
Also the party of "my body my choice".
Posted on 5/25/18 at 1:30 pm to texridder
quote:I have actually found something I agree with you on. There is hope yet.
Why do you think that? If someone is actually terminal, way shouldn't they be able to take a drug that hasn't been approved? In some cases it takes a drug as long as 10 years to be approved.
Posted on 5/25/18 at 1:32 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
Likewise if someone is dying of cancer and we have the ability to administer medicine to save their life, we have the responsibility to do so.
What if
A) the treatment is $3T
B) the result isn’t curative but only prolongs life by 30 days
And C) the patient is in so much pain for those 30 days that they will Be basically non-functioning?
Posted on 5/25/18 at 1:34 pm to the808bass
quote:Oh for frick sake.
What if A) the treatment is $3T B) the result isn’t curative but only prolongs life by 30 days And C) the patient is in so much pain for those 30 days that they will Be basically non-functioning?
Posted on 5/25/18 at 1:36 pm to the808bass
quote:
Right to try is shitty legislation. Know who loves right to try? Big pharma.
Know who develops life saving medications? Big pharma.
Posted on 5/25/18 at 1:39 pm to Jbird
It’s called an argument ad absurdum. If we agree that there’s no infinite resources required by morality to exact minor changes in life and that quality of life is part of the equation, then we have removed another false binary choice. But I don’t imagine you made it past word 5 in this post without your eyes glazing over.
Posted on 5/25/18 at 1:41 pm to the808bass
quote:
My friend lobbied against Missouri’s right to try. Every pharma company had a lobbyist there in support of the bill.
Ohhh, that makes you and your friend experts then. Cool.
You sound like you're just talking out of your arse just to be contrarian.
This bill is a good thing, and if you or a loved one was in a situation where experimental meds may help, you'd probably change your mind about it.
Posted on 5/25/18 at 1:42 pm to the808bass
quote:
the808bass
Do some research on how much Big pharma spends on R&D for one product line. And remember, most never make it to market.
Posted on 5/25/18 at 1:43 pm to the808bass
quote:
What if
1. You had a functioning brain...
2. You were not blinded by your hate for all things Trump...
3. Your mother had aborted you?
Posted on 5/25/18 at 1:43 pm to i am dan
quote:
Know who develops life saving medications? Big pharma.
They do. Around 10% of all drugs filed are ever approved. When you move to the areas of cancer or cardiovascular drugs, it drops to about 5%. The largest dropout rate of those drugs fail after phase 2 testing.
Posted on 5/25/18 at 1:43 pm to i am dan
quote:Nope, he said "death happens"...he wouldn't try to save his loved one.
if you or a loved one was in a situation where experimental meds may help, you'd probably change your mind about it.
Posted on 5/25/18 at 1:44 pm to i am dan
quote:
This bill is a good thing, and if you or a loved one was in a situation where experimental meds may help, you'd probably change your mind about it.
Explain what benefits are gained over the current “Compassionate Use” policy.
Posted on 5/25/18 at 1:45 pm to the808bass
quote:
So you’re excited about a bill big pharma loves so that what will happen exactly?
All this bill probably does is remove some of the human trials, which takes years.
Your hatred is certainly clouding your judgement. How does this affect you anyway? Just shut up.
Posted on 5/25/18 at 1:45 pm to The Maj
You contribution in content matter has been a thing of beauty in this thread.
Posted on 5/25/18 at 1:46 pm to i am dan
quote:
All this bill probably does is remove some of the human trials, which takes years.
Bzzzt. Try again.
Posted on 5/25/18 at 1:46 pm to Jbird
quote:
Windfall from dozens!
lol, yep. Just killed his own argument. That was too easy.
Posted on 5/25/18 at 1:47 pm to the808bass
quote:
A) the treatment is $3T B) the result isn’t curative but only prolongs life by 30 days And C) the patient is in so much pain for those 30 days that they will Be basically non-functioning?
Then you pump them full of morphine and let them die 30 days later than they would have otherwise.
Page 8 of 11
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News