undefined | Better HN

0 pointss1artibartfast3y ago0 comments

They are using the current state of the law as their definition for what is unethical, not any attribute or characteristic of the act itself. This is circular.

It does nothing to explain what is ethical or not. Have someone who's worked in preclinical testing and clinical trials, my impression is also that they don't have firm understanding of what the current status even is. It isn't a hard line, but negotiated with the FDA on a Case by case basis.

0 comments

2 comments · 1 top-level

foldr3y ago· 1 in thread

>They are using the current state of the law as their definition for what is unethical

No, they're not. See here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35837498

>It isn't a hard line, but negotiated with the FDA on a Case by case basis.

Of course it's not a hard line, but this particular case falls way over on the 'not allowed' side. It's not any kind of borderline case.

s1artibartfastOP3y ago

>>They are using the current state of the law as their definition for what is unethical

>No, they're not. See here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35837498

They are making arbitrary assumptions for what is a procedure is, when it is in fact open ended, calling it "dangerous, highly experimental, early stage medical procedure"

They are assuming that the same procedure done in monkeys would be done in humans, which is not supported by the quote, or how the real world works.

You can different experiments in humans than monkeys to achieve the same goal, they need not be identical, or even similar.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse