Thanks to everyone who responded about who they most resembled out of their mother or father...... it is always interesting to see how we take the traits (good and bad) of the ones that spend so much time shaping our early lives.
Anyway, this week is a more of a tougher question... I was listening to some podcasts... and most of my podcasts are quite scientific in nature, and there were interviews with researchers who were highlighting how most of modern medicine has been geared towards the treatment and efficacy in men. Now, this is not a discrimination thing as such... it was just deemed in the past that the fluctuating hormone levels of women made them unreliable test subjects for medical trials. Needless to say, this has meant that there are certain drugs that work much less well in women (or not at all...) due to the lack of testing on subjects.
As a corollary to this, there has also been a lack of information and testing of drugs in pregnant women... for some reason, it is considered unethical to test on a pregnant women (joking... don't flame me...). Thus, pregnant women are usually unable to get prescriptions from a doctor as most of them will just say... I'm not sure... I don't know!
So, without going to the bad old days of the early 20th century where you could just test medical treatments out on unsuspecting humans... should we be testing medical drugs on pregnant women?
My Question
- Do you think it would be a good idea (ethical...) to test medicines on pregnant women, to gather data about the efficacy of the drugs... so that women who are pregnant and in need of some sort of medicine can have some certainty about efficacy and side effects?
My sample answer
Well... I'm stuck. On one hand, I am of the opinion that more data is always better, and so there is that side of me which says that as long as the trials are not forced, and the pregnant women are consenting... then there is no problem! However, that said... there is a potential third party who can not give consent...
... on yet another hand, I do think that abortion is a women's right.. and no one else's business.. and that also involves the lack of consent from the same third party.
... so, I would say that in the case of abortion, I don't consider early term pregnancies to be "alive", much in the same way I wouldn't consider single and multi-celled creatures "alive". By "alive", I mean that they are conscious and intelligent life forms.... so by this reasoning, I would consider that the third party consent of the fetus, is the proxied to the mother.
... so, if I follow the same logic, then the medical experimentation on pregnant women is not a problem as long as the woman has given consent for the trial. In the end, it is more useful to have solid data so that treatments can be suggested and given with some degree of certainty. Acting (or avoiding action) whilst cloaked in ignorance is for me a far greater danger...
... bleah... but like I said, I'm not sure!
Rules
- Upvote is not required, but appreciated!
- Resteem is NOT necessary!
- In the comments, answer as best as you can the questions that are posed in the "My Questions"!
- I have added a small Steem-Bounty to the post, so that everyone who replies with a valid entry will get something back. If I give your post a small upvote, it is valid (also, subscribe to @dustsweeper for maximum benefit!).
- I will be sponsoring as many people as this post pays out in liquid SBD/STEEM. Also I will kick in at least the required amount to round up to the full number. Winner is by random generator after a shortlisting of quality comments!
- PLEASE PLEASE Don’t upvote your OWN comment. I can’t stop you doing it, but it seems to mess up the distribution of the Bounty for everyone else. If you upvote your own comment, I will consider it an invalid entry when doing the draw.
Steem Basic Income
One of the first communities that I came in contact with at the beginning of my time at Steemit was @steembasicincome. As a author starting out on your fresh new Steemit account, Steemit can be a daunting and lonely place to be. OFten, it can feel like you are posting into an abyss with no one listening and with no ability to grow out of the situation. A share of Steem Basic Income gives you a guaranteed vote on one post a day, thus giving you a small but over time cumulative support to your account to help grow you out of your initial wilderness!
With this post, I want to help sponsor people who might not even have the spare 1 STEEM that is required for registration. So, when this post pays out, I will sponsor people depending on the payout of this post. Basically, I will round up the SBD payout from this post and then that will be the number of people I will sponsor. (So, if the payout is 2.3 SBD, I will sponsor 3 people). OF course, this is not simply an altruistic move, as the sponsor of a Steem Basic Income share also gets a share, so it is a great way to help others whilst helping yourself!
Last week's winners
The last post paid out 0.594 SBD and 0 STEEM in liquid earnings. So, that would make 2 shares.
The winners by random draw are:
Account banner by jimramones
.gif)
@bengy has set 1.000 STEEM bounty on this post!
Bounties let you earn rewards without the need for Steem Power. Go here to learn how bounties work.
Earn the bounty by commenting what you think the bounty creator wants to know from you.
Find more bounties here and become a bounty hunter.
Happy Rewards Hunting!
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Congratulations to the following winner(s) of the bounty!
Find more bounties here and become a bounty hunter.
Find more bounties here and become a bounty hunter.
Find more bounties here and become a bounty hunter.
Find more bounties here and become a bounty hunter.
Find more bounties here and become a bounty hunter.
Find more bounties here and become a bounty hunter.
Find more bounties here and become a bounty hunter.
Find more bounties here and become a bounty hunter.
Find more bounties here and become a bounty hunter.
Find more bounties here and become a bounty hunter.
Find more bounties here and become a bounty hunter.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
(p.s. excuse me if I sound rude at some points - my english lacks of nuances, as I am not a native speaker. I spent 50 mins of my life on this right now... it would be a nice thing for me to receive smth back. I do lack RC for commenting and communicating on my level.. thats it..)
the ethical questions are the most hard ones, cause they DONT have a clear single answer, its a bit like a game with non-zero summa. the answer valid to one socium in given time, can be very unvalid to other socium in another time, with other given conditions. there were periods of history, where the quote 'human's life is the cheapest thing in univerce' was born.
now, let me take myself to your Q.
the answer is: yes, why not! when we change xxx to woman, it is still "yes'. when we change xxx to 'pregnant woman', suddenly it occures that we have are stalking a grey zone, and have doubts. did something changed... sufficiently? there were some laws, that prohibited a (guilty and pregnant) woman execution till she give a birth to her child. I think, the basic idea is the same here: we can talk out and do what we need with the woman, but we have no moral rights to do anything with her child.
I think using logica will bring us to a further logical decision: given that mother is responsible for her child and makes all the decisions for his well-being, using un-tested drug is upon her decision. (did we get any 'new' knowlegde through these reasonings? I dont think so, actually). oh, and by the way, during pregnancy women's ability to think, to considerate things and take comprehensible desisions -- falls down considerably...
we can try to count pros and contras of each decision (to take untested drugs or not to). tho I consider we cant sum up mechanically pros and contras in this case. to me (i'm not a loving mother) bonus to all the human sociaty prevails the minus of losing one certain baby, or getting it injured during the medication. the value society will be getting in the long-run perspective, the mankind is already 8 billions and still growing, Doctor Maltus is laughting very much at us from Heaven. we are a problem for our planet, and it will be solving this problem in one way or another. and it already started, you know. wars, diseases and the hunger - is the arsenal.
but all this considerations is a total waste of time, just an excersise in rhetorics. the answer is: yes! and you know, why? just because!
also, I think your question is kinda a trap. any words are a trap, actually. I mean, being constructed in this way, the question is momentarily direct you, your mind, your modus operandi to move in a certain direction.
do we need pregnant women to bring us some new healthy members of society? of course!! should we increase by all possible means the odds that worsen it? yes. (who will put here 'no', I wonder?.. ) -> then medicine is ok. correct? no! it seems to me, exactly here the substitution of the concept takes place, we substitute a part of the answer that is known in advance... the 'good medicine' suddenly grows to the size of A Very Huge Importance in our days. you think all about it, like, what if she is getting no medicine, the concequences will be terrible, diff problems, injury, maybe death. The truth is: healthy woman will not need medicins, actually, she dont need even doctors! doctors and medicines are needed to a percent of woman, whose cases really suffer from some problems. and now, the sad news: there amount of healthy women in our society ... well, I think you've got the idea.
so. my conclusion: people have to be well-educated, trained (yes! giving a birth is a bit like a job done in a right way, it needs some training and skills etc), and medicine is really needed in exceptional cases. Understanding this, I believe, should eliminate the fear of “not receiving the medicine”, and at the same time - the question "how can we give to a pregnant woman an untested medication" - disappears by itself, because it is not the worst of evils, and it does not solve most of the problem. The size of the problem, suddenly, is decreased!
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
This post was shared in the Curation Collective Discord community for curators, and upvoted and resteemed by the @c-squared community account after manual review.
@c-squared runs a community witness. Please consider using one of your witness votes on us here
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Wow... thanks for the great amount of effort that you put into this reply! I will have a bonus SBI share for you at payout.
As to the actual comment, I fully agree with what you have posted... mostly, from a very logical point of view... there is no "problem", however... for some reason, most of society disagrees with that, and there is a problem... perhaps it is emotional and perhaps it is due to mores that are grounded in a different age or perspective.
I like the way that you argued your way to your conclusion... I tried to do a similar thing, but I'm not so skilled with these things! For me, the idea of getting information (to be able to intelligently act upon in the future) is something of paramount importance. Emotion and "morals" are useful... but don't really have the same power as informed and educated analysis for making decisions.
In many ways, this fear of consenting experimentation is a misplaced paternal protection of women and children... and in doing so, it removes the ability actually effectively treat any problems that come up during the pregnancy period.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
The winners and the next SBI contest (I'm a monster...) can be found here:
https://steemit.com/contest/@bengy/steembasicincomegiveawayimamonster-ut4bexkm71
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Greetings, Benji!
I have to say, in my opinion, as long as women give their consent, it should be legal. I mean, they could be part of some sort of cell-improving medicine (that sounds stupid, I know). Not all experimental drugs must cause damage, I think if a drug is thought to improve in some way unborn babies, mothers should decide if they want it for their fetus. It could result in an improvement for many future babies... Who knows?
I apologize if I offend someone.
Peace, buddies ;)
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Not all drugs cause damage... that is true... there is also the other side, do the medicines do what they are supposed to do?... that is also something that we should have data on!
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
The winners and the next SBI contest (I'm a monster...) can be found here:
https://steemit.com/contest/@bengy/steembasicincomegiveawayimamonster-ut4bexkm71
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Oh awesome, I won! Thanks so much I appreciate it.
That is a tough question. I agree that more data is better and definitly that consent is required. I think that pregnant women should be the last ones tested on in a trial series and hat they should definitly be informed on any and all potential side effects. The research should be reviewed by an ethics board and participants should probably be screened for vilnerabilities as well. For example, if an incentive is being offered (I.e. money) then an individuals situation should be considered. Are they engaging in the research and potentially putting a child (or fetus) at risk simply for the money? That's hard to judge...there are a lot of nuances to this. That's tough. Overall I'd say I'm for it if they are competent to make the decision for themselves and they consent after being fully informed.
Posted using Partiko Android
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I think that in general, I do agree... we don't know enough about the efficacy during this still stage. So, it would be better to have better information and thus be able to make informed choices.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
The winners and the next SBI contest (I'm a monster...) can be found here:
https://steemit.com/contest/@bengy/steembasicincomegiveawayimamonster-ut4bexkm71
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I will never think it will be a good option to test medicines on pregnant women that is and will be dangerous
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
It is definitely risky, but without information on how medicines work... it could be even more risky with no knowledge!
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
The winners and the next SBI contest (I'm a monster...) can be found here:
https://steemit.com/contest/@bengy/steembasicincomegiveawayimamonster-ut4bexkm71
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I don't think we need to drag this issue for long, truth be told, it's unethical to me to gather data at the expense of a new born baby, an innocent life form.
No, it is not right to use drugs on the pregnant mother, I believe now that there are other ways to test run drugs before giving it to original host, no matter how beneficial the drugs might be, we must know it's still at the expense of a pregnant woman. And a innocent baby.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Whilst I do have some sympathy for your position, unfortunately, we can't be sure that drugs that are tested on males or non-pregnant women behave as expected in pregnant women. Thus, it could be dangerous or useless to prescribe them based on testing on the wrong people! It is something that has happened with testing on men, and then not having the same results replicated exactly in women.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
The winners and the next SBI contest (I'm a monster...) can be found here:
https://steemit.com/contest/@bengy/steembasicincomegiveawayimamonster-ut4bexkm71
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Giving them different medicine during pregnancy is not recommended as it could harm the fetus thus giving a higher chance for a problem to occur
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Definitely true, but we don't even know for sure what the effects of current medicines are!
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
The winners and the next SBI contest (I'm a monster...) can be found here:
https://steemit.com/contest/@bengy/steembasicincomegiveawayimamonster-ut4bexkm71
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I think that the only time when a test may be possible is when the unborn child is in life danger and the untested drug could be the only way to save the child's life.
Of course, the parent must be fully aware of all possible complications.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Definitely a valid point of view... But essentially all existing medicine is 'untested' on the pregnant group due to fear of harming the unborn. This, by this logic... Nothing should be prescribed?
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
The winners and the next SBI contest (I'm a monster...) can be found here:
https://steemit.com/contest/@bengy/steembasicincomegiveawayimamonster-ut4bexkm71
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
In my opinion it is bad idea to test drugs on pergnant women. Anyway even if woman in need or she has hard life situation Noone don't know how it will affect on child.
So my position I'm against such experiments on people.
Posted using Partiko Android
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
It is an interesting position... However, if we consider that most medicines are untested directly on pregnant women then we actually are running on assumptions that may or may not be true. So by not testing, we can be causing harm through ignorance?
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Hmm I think in such position you are right but anyway it's risky and unfortunately now we don't know way how to test medicines without straight testing on people 🤔
Posted using Partiko Android
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
The winners and the next SBI contest (I'm a monster...) can be found here:
https://steemit.com/contest/@bengy/steembasicincomegiveawayimamonster-ut4bexkm71
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
No. This action my is dangerous to the lives of both the mother and baby. It's too much risk for me. There can be better alternatives to test such drugs.
Posted using Partiko Android
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Unfortunately, at some stage, testing needs to be done on the actual intended recipients of the drug (at the moment...). If we don't, then we make assumptions that might or might not be true and this had been shown to be already a problem in the medical field. So, by avoiding testing, we might be indirectly causing harm via lack of information.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
The winners and the next SBI contest (I'm a monster...) can be found here:
https://steemit.com/contest/@bengy/steembasicincomegiveawayimamonster-ut4bexkm71
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Thank you!
Posted using Partiko Android
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
There are plenty of pregnant women getting a prescription, more do get them as not. Not only by doctors but also by midwife's, hospitals, etc.
There is no med in the world (my world) where is not written to if it will harm the mother and/or child (it always does but sometimes there are no other options.)
It is the first time I hear meds work less with women but it does not surprise me (nothing works with me but not because of my hormone level).
Should we test on pregnant women?
No!
We already test enough on animals and humans and the outcome is seldom satisfying (500 people is also not a guarantee if it's safe).
At the moment there is no other way as giving a certain med to a pregnant woman and she agrees, it is a test already.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
👆🙌
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
At the moment, prescriptions are generally made based on assumptions that are not tested. Which may or may not be true... The tests were usually done on healthy young male humans... With the assumption that it would be the same across the population. However, there is growing evidence that that is possibly not the case.
Anyway, with respect to the 500 people statement, 500 is an okay size (more is better, but this is difficult in non physics fields). This is handled by statistical analysis (whether or not this has been applied properly is a different question). Apologies if the following is already familiar to you, I'm not sure what your background is!
Scientific testing is done by the rejection of a null hypothesis, there can never be a guarantee. There can only be the acceptance of rejection of a null hypothesis (that there is significant signal one way or another) compared to pure chance. This acceptance or rejection also comes with a statistical confidence of being correct or incorrect. So if you reject... You still have a chance for incorrectly rejecting when you should have accepted and vice versa. This is the importance for repeated studies and trials... As the likelihood for the incorrect reject/accept goes down with more studies. This is why it is always possible to find a study that supports a point of view... But much more difficult to find multiple studies (in relation to the total studies) if your point of view is not likely to be correct.
Apologies again if you already knew this stuff, but I wasn't sure... And I wouldn't start at the mathematical immediately!
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Thanks for your long answer. You made me wiser. If mostly young men are tested the tests are not useful.
I assume doctors registrate the results of meds somewhere too or only in cases of?
Posted using Partiko Android
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I think they probably take note of it... I know that some countries have a self-reporting register... however, the data is too biased and uncontrolled to be of much use. Unfortunately, not all members of the public realise this... and it leads to cherry picking of the public data as "proof".
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
The winners and the next SBI contest (I'm a monster...) can be found here:
https://steemit.com/contest/@bengy/steembasicincomegiveawayimamonster-ut4bexkm71
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
First thanks for the selecting me (* even though it is random). :)
When I first read your question for the week I thought of the book "Geek Love" (* here on amazon https://amzn.to/2Q9qGy9 ). This book is about a female geek (* "Geek" is a someone who used to bite the heads off of chickens or mice for the entertainment of the audience), who falls in love with the ringmaster. Voluntarily while she is pregnant the ringmaster and her inject drugs into her body so that they can have deformed children. These children will then be part of a traveling sideshow. The book follows the lives of these children it is fiction that in mind and, It's a very fascinating book with a weird twist at the end.
While I know your question is not about this, it sort of reminds me of it.
The ethical question of human experimentation to further knowledge... That's deep. On one hand I see the value that it brings, on the other hand while the mother may consent, the child does not have the ability to consent. So would it be worth sacrificing one child to bring about potentially life-saving treatments for millions?I don't have a good answer for that.
Thank you though for the mind twisting question. :D
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
No problem... you can thank Google's RNG!
Okay... let's just start by saying... I've never heard that definition of "geek"! I'm thinking I will only refer to myself as a nerd from now on... plus, you read strange books!
Possibly your answer to the question is the best we can do! I have an opinion, but... it isn't an easy choice!
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
The winners and the next SBI contest (I'm a monster...) can be found here:
https://steemit.com/contest/@bengy/steembasicincomegiveawayimamonster-ut4bexkm71
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
In America we are experimented on by big pharma/Medical lobbyist for decades with no real oversight on vaccines or medicine produced through actual peer reviewed studies. More often than not the government allows for no liability or regulation in using these taboo treatments and 'prevenative' care.
Just because of these pretty well-known and basic facts experimenting on pregnant women in my opinion is is the last thing we should be doing. There is no accountability for the drugs they make and how they treat people with them.
I remember when my kids mother was pregnant with our first kid. They wanted to do ultrasound every two weeks and when Mom was in extreme pain from the baby simply not being positioned right in her Tummy they tried prescribing her Lortabs and Vicodin while she was six months pregnant. I saw then just how cruel and heartless at least the American Medical system is I'm not sure how that UK system is seeing as I've never even been east of the Rockies in America. I hope all is well bro keep on killing it on the steem posts!
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Definitely, in the none to recent past after World War 2, there was a bit of reckless experimentation with a lot of the medical and social sciences (well... also a bit in the physical sciences....). It was also a time that people were doing experiments to prove a hypothesis... rather than modern method of trying to use probably statistical analysis to glean signals from the data against chance (see another reply in this post) to falsify a hypothesis. Also, we have a bit of problem with some past medical studies not applying statistics correctly and accidentally getting results which are unsupported and possibly unreplicable.
However, I'm also not just talking about untested "experimental" drugs in this case... the problem is that drugs and medicines that we always thought were "known" are just "unknown" or "untested" because the assumption was that everyone would react in the same statistical way as healthy males... and for less complexity, women were excluded from studies. Now, we are getting more sure that this is not the correct assumption... and in that case, pregnant women would also be a class of patients who have unknown data from "safe" and "known" treatments. Now, it could be that things do work as expected... or at best as a placebo... or have no effect.... or they could be harmful... but without direct studies, we just don't know!
I can't read much into the American system, but I think that in this case, it is a difference in practical application vs knowledge. From what I understand, the American system of healthcare... is at best, interesting... with it being based upon some really weird (at least as an outsider) system of perverse incentives.... and the healthcare system (and the rankings on the page that you provide) can't be taken in isolation from the general society. My opinion of the American society in general (again, as an outsider... and not saying that other places are better/worse) is that there are some really strange incentives and structures in place that appear to have been brought about by a slightly overlarge importance being placed on the concepts of independence/freedom. This seems to have gone so far as to render communal co-operation and support to be almost non-existent... or at the very least shouted down as communism or socialism.
One amusing anecdote that I had read about was after the disastrous flooding in your Southern states (quite a few years ago now... Katerina?).... they brought in some Dutch experts to help plan the coastal defences against a recurrence. What the Dutch found was that each county acted independently, basically with the effect of just shunting the problem and flooding to the next county on the border. When the Dutch suggested that it required a co-ordinated planning and funding, they were told that it was socialist and a Communist way of thinking... and they met heavy resistance to those ideas. Thankfully, clear heads eventually seemed to have prevailed... but it is that sort of thing that appears quite odd to outside observers!
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
The winners and the next SBI contest (I'm a monster...) can be found here:
https://steemit.com/contest/@bengy/steembasicincomegiveawayimamonster-ut4bexkm71
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Pregnant Women is no Go! It is to Danger
Posted using Partiko Android
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Definitely, that is the initial reaction by many... however, if you consider that even "trusted" medicines haven't been directly tested and reliable data gleaned... then we are prescribing drugs with no real knowledge... isn't that more dangerous?
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
The winners and the next SBI contest (I'm a monster...) can be found here:
https://steemit.com/contest/@bengy/steembasicincomegiveawayimamonster-ut4bexkm71
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
@bengy, In my opinion if it's a new Test then in my opinion Pregnant Women should not be allowed because it's a critical situation and position for them. And we all know that new tests and medications can hold it's own reactions because in it's a science and whatever happens for the first time, it's a experiment so in my opinion experiment should not be allowed in this case.
Posted using Partiko Android
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Yes... new drugs would have to be met with caution... and probably run the gamut of other human subjects first. However, given that we can't be 95% sure of current "common" drugs... then we should test those at least?
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Anything which ensures that it will not hurt then that's fine. Have a blessed time ahead.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
The winners and the next SBI contest (I'm a monster...) can be found here:
https://steemit.com/contest/@bengy/steembasicincomegiveawayimamonster-ut4bexkm71
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
👍
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I missed a few of these and I showed up for a hard one. I fall down this line on stuff with that risk the life of the child. First few months okay I get it and agree it is not aware. I still don't like it cause it is a choice to do the actions that lead to pregnancy. At least most of the time. I wish people took that more serious. Yet I have to share that the core of your question I agree with that more data is better. And if the woman is willing and it is either early or needed I have no issue. I would not agree with this past 7 months. As the baby could be removed and taken care of to grow up just fine. My first child was born 6 weeks early and didn't even have to stay in the hospital. Any who wants to pretend that isn't a person just hasn't seen a baby that old she and looked up and me and smiled that is a living person. I do know that a for of medications are considered safe for moms to take here so I am wondering if you are talking about stuff that is maybe for more serious illness?
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
As far as I understand... a lot of the medications that are considered "safe"... have not been directly tested for efficacy and safety. If not, then those tests should be done... at least those are low hanging ethical fruits! More problematic are the definite unknowns with no background data....
It is an interesting idea that you bring up though... the woman makes so many decisions regarding the health of the unborn (food, excercise just to name a few...)... why is it that she can make those decisions, which can also have diasterous side-effects if "bad" or risky choices are made... but not this?
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
The winners and the next SBI contest (I'm a monster...) can be found here:
https://steemit.com/contest/@bengy/steembasicincomegiveawayimamonster-ut4bexkm71
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
To say that the women can decide for themselves whether or not they are available for such experiments ultimately leads to poor people having things tested on them that neither they themselves nor experts can reasonably judge in terms of danger.
I think in most countries such tests on people with good reason are forbidden.
Animals are used instead to do more research, but there are of course limits here as well.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Hmmm... that would be a good argument that part of the duty of citizenry is that they be available for random selection for drug trails! I'm joking... that would be a terrible idea....
Human tests are common... only after a very very long time... both for safety and efficacy.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
The winners and the next SBI contest (I'm a monster...) can be found here:
https://steemit.com/contest/@bengy/steembasicincomegiveawayimamonster-ut4bexkm71
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Hi @bengy!
Your post was upvoted by @steem-ua, new Steem dApp, using UserAuthority for algorithmic post curation!
Your UA account score is currently 4.653 which ranks you at #1655 across all Steem accounts.
Your rank has improved 6 places in the last three days (old rank 1661).
In our last Algorithmic Curation Round, consisting of 208 contributions, your post is ranked at #59.
Evaluation of your UA score:
Feel free to join our @steem-ua Discord server
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
To say that the women can decide for themselves whether or not they are available for such experiments ultimately leads to poor people having things tested on them that neither they themselves nor experts can reasonably judge in terms of danger.
I think in most countries such tests on people with good reason are forbidden.
Animals are used instead to do more research, but there are of course limits here as well.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit