undefined | Better HN

0 pointsjboggan4y ago0 comments

I would like to see an example of previous trials where the placebo group was invalidated prematurely by informing them and giving them the actual drug. If this is common practice I'm not aware of it.

Note the date on this article - this was back in February of this year: https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2021/02/19/9691430...

Don't denigrate a perfectly valid criticism of deviations from historical norms of drug validation and approval by calling it a "conspiracy theory".

0 comments

gzer04y ago

The use of placebos in controlled clinical trials must be justified by a positive risk-benefit analysis, and the subjects must be fully informed of the risks involved in the assignment to the placebo group.

Continued assignment of subjects to placebo is unethical, once there is good evidence to support the efficacy of the trial therapy.

Unfortunately (or fortunately) since there was such strong evidence to prove the efficacy, it became unethical for the continued assignment of placebo.

ninorata4y ago

The good old "is unethical to do a double blind study". This one is by far the best invention of the Big Pharma PR departments, you basically cannot make the study that will prove for sure that their product is safe (and stick it to all those anti vaxxers once and for all) Talk about having your cake and eating it too...

js24y ago

Here's one. I'm sure you can find others ("terminated for benefit"). For statistical reasons, terminating a trial for benefit is relatively uncommon (most terminations occur for other reasons):

https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.111...

Here's an article on the ethics of a placebo-controlled trial in the first place. It's complicated.

https://acrpnet.org/2018/12/06/ethical-deliberations-on-usin...

Enginerrrd4y ago

This happened with low-dose Aspirin for prevention of heart-attacks and strokes. The protective effect was so profound that they considered it unethical to let the control group proceed without it.

79524y ago

Surely the point of a placebo in this case was to measure effectiveness rather than detect long term side effects. There are other methods of establishing a control such as comparing to the general population.

yonaguska4y ago

Not if the general population is mandated to be vaccinated.

79524y ago

But that is not what happened. Not everyone has had the jab. And those that were vaccinated did not all receive the same vaccine.

Anyway none of your comments actually address the science involved. A few factoids without any context is not useful.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 pointsjboggan4y ago0 comments

Note the date on this article - this was back in February of this year: https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2021/02/19/9691430...

Don't denigrate a perfectly valid criticism of deviations from historical norms of drug validation and approval by calling it a "conspiracy theory".

0 comments

gzer04y ago

Continued assignment of subjects to placebo is unethical, once there is good evidence to support the efficacy of the trial therapy.

Unfortunately (or fortunately) since there was such strong evidence to prove the efficacy, it became unethical for the continued assignment of placebo.

ninorata4y ago

js24y ago

Here's one. I'm sure you can find others ("terminated for benefit"). For statistical reasons, terminating a trial for benefit is relatively uncommon (most terminations occur for other reasons):

https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.111...

Here's an article on the ethics of a placebo-controlled trial in the first place. It's complicated.

https://acrpnet.org/2018/12/06/ethical-deliberations-on-usin...

Enginerrrd4y ago

This happened with low-dose Aspirin for prevention of heart-attacks and strokes. The protective effect was so profound that they considered it unethical to let the control group proceed without it.

79524y ago

yonaguska4y ago

Not if the general population is mandated to be vaccinated.

79524y ago

But that is not what happened. Not everyone has had the jab. And those that were vaccinated did not all receive the same vaccine.

Anyway none of your comments actually address the science involved. A few factoids without any context is not useful.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse