Minutus

My husband pointed out a spine-chilling article in this week’s New Yorker magazine by someone who has researched the issue and gotten to know a number of people who are “guinea-piggers”, i.e., are being paid tidy sums to participate in the first round of new drug testing—not even by the pHARMaceutical companies in all cases, but many by independent companies who stage the “first-round” drug tests.
Among other interesting bits, it said that the [US, presumably] patent on a new drug only lasts for 20 years, so the drug companies are in a big hurry to get them on the shelves. The article recounts horror stories about harm done to those who have tested new drugs, and also notes that some companies are or were still using homeless alcoholics and other people who had few options as guinea-pigs—shades of the syphilis studies where men were studied and NOT treated (though those conducting the study believed that they could have helped the sufferers with drugs) in our South in the early to mid part of the 1900s! Teresa (Northern VA)

--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, "Teresa Kramer"
wrote:
Yorker
a number
to
companies who

I was raised on the New Yorker. Reading cartoons as a youngster and
developing an real interest in epidemiology from the many articles by
Bernard Rouche before he died. Also a lifelong feeling
that "jewelry" was diamonds, pearls and gold from all the Tiffany,
Cartier, etc. ads. I knew that diamonds were a girl's best friend
from the age of ten!

Homeopathy seems so respectable and ethical when you read articles
like the one you referred to. Another interesting one was the
article about the man who instituted the "checklist" into Detroit
hospitals and reduced the incidence of staph infections in hospital
patients (that's currently a leading cause of death for people
hospitalized for other reasons, especially surgery) and how much
trouble the guy had "interferring" with the autonomy of the medical
profession. No airline pilot would ever take off or land without
going through the required checklist.

Maybe a little OT and the articles certainly point out the ecomonic
considerations behind "modern" medicine which has a great need to
attack modalities such as homeopathy because it is perceived as
a "threat" to the current medical approach to help humans (and with
the vets, our animals)in regard to their health and well-being.
Isn't Hahnemann "quaint" in his approach to his medical practice
where miniumum dosages and doing the least amount of harm are guiding
principles?

Barbara

i had a friend in the phoenix area who took part in
trial tests for deodorants. they could only participate
for so long because of the side effects that would occur.
as i recall, they got paid $5/hr--minumum wage in the usa
at the time.
this was akin to giving blood every week for $5/pint.
however, there were no side effects (except for the
aids cases that accrued in the 1980's till they became
aware of the needle dangers).
so the side effects became part of the shared 'culture' among
those who earned some money doing this sort of thing. there
was no concern for long term damaging consequences and the
mftr never claimed any responsibility.
tanya