Should We Use Experimental Drugs on Prisoners?

[Hear Again]

Right! I was never implying to give the testing to those who are "insane" or deemed so! Just the death row/lifers who are able to understand the experiemental testing and agree to it. They are "sane" or would be put elsewhere and not put to death. They know, that by agreeing to the testing, that it could, in fact, make their last days/years on earth a little more pleasant. Or could, in fact, kill them...or drive them crazy, then they would be moved to the "insane" ward and live out the rest of their years!

Are people, who are on the street, sane or insane, agreeing to this testing?

for the clarification.

As for the last question in your post, there are many people in the free world who volunteer for these studies. I see commercials on TV for research studies related to free medical care and drug treatment if someone smokes, has depression or another kind of disorder, illness or health problem.

Speaking for myself, if they offered a new medication that could cure bipolar, I'd be tempted to participate.

 

[jillio]

I'm sure that a lot of the people on the street that agree to the testing have phychological problems too. IMO, any "sane" person would never agree to be subject to experimental testing.

For those with a terminal illness, then again, saying "they are gonna die regardless"....who accept the testing, in hopes it will save/prolong their lives, or for the benefit of mankind, I agree.

Wasn't Ted Bundy considered to be highly intelligent? Then deemed criminally insane?

If these death row/lifer prisoners are healthy in body and judged "sane" when the commited the crime....and "sane" afterwards then why Not??....

We would never impose such testing on those who are mental retarded! And those prisoners on death row/lifers are not retarded, or they would have been sent to places for the criminally insane/retarded and allowed to live.

Participants are screened carefully to determine that they are not suffering from a mental illness that will impair their judgement and ability to give fully informed consent.

Intelligence and insanity are not correlated. Many, many people suffering from a mental illness are highly intelligent. Nor does being "retarded" (an offensive term, BTW) have anything to do with being criminally insane.

Again, there is the problem of logistics. Do you have any idea how much it would cost to transport on a daily basis, and provide guards to be present during the experimental procedures? These experiments must be done in a controlled environment, and extraneous variables must be limited, or the experiment is not valid and the results mean absolutely nothing.

 

[jillio]

Sometimes prisoners who are deemed criminally insane are kept in a different area (in the general population) that is designed for those who have mental illness instead of being sent to psychiatric hospitals.

Fortunately, psychiatrists are on staff to talk to prisoners who are mentally ill as well as to adjust their meds if needed. The care they receive is less than satisfactory compared to what it is available in the outside world, but it's better than nothing.

More often than not, that is the case. Only the most severe cases are sent to forensic institutions.

 

[rockin'robin]

for the clarification.

As for the last question in your post, there are many people in the free world who volunteer for these studies. I see commercials on TV for research studies related to free medical care and drug treatment if someone smokes, has depression or another kind of disorder, illness or health problem.

Speaking for myself, if they offered a new medication that could cure bipolar, I'd be tempted to participate.

I do see ur point! But, suppose something goes wrong with you? And I do agree, that the testing is imperative to anyone who has a disease. Suppose you agreed to the testing, and for some reason it affected ur brain, caused you to become crippled, etc. These experimental drugs can affect people in mysterious ways!...And the FDA knows it. Say, you were a normal person, with a job, family, etc. And agreed to the testing...something went haywire and you are seriously sick, brain damaged, etc. It happens!...

I know there are many studies asking people to participate in these studies. And I do agree, they are needed!! A couple thousands of dollars and "free" medical care....after the fact....doesn't cut it with me! The damage has already been done even if it's years down the road.

It has to be done, I also agree. And all in all, I was just suggesting that death row/lifers in prison, in my opinion, are the ones who should be tested IF they agreed to it. No force whatsoever!....They have no job, no life outside a prison cell, they don't vote (I don't believe so)....And they would be giving something back to society that they took away to begin with, such as murder.

 

[Hear Again]

I do see ur point! But, suppose something goes wrong with you?

That's a good question and is exactly why I said I would be tempted to participate because I worry about something happening to me.

Besides, I'm just now reaching the point where my bipolar has stabilized with new meds, so there really isn't a point in participating in a research study given the potential it has of creating more harm than good.

 

[Hear Again]

Taking mental illness out of the picture, what would happen to pharmaceutical companies if a prisoner died as a result of this testing -- especially if they did not agree to participate? Pharmaceutical companies would have all kinds of liability issues.

 

[Liebling:-)))]

The discussion remind me of those Jews who get in the gas shower and dying there, which I studied at my school.

Yes, and also Josef Mengelé as well.. what and how he did to children with different races especially twins...

I don't see any reason to put the prisoners in the testing without agree to be an volunteer. They can if they want to, but we can't just take them out of the prison and do something to their body, the experiments on the prisoners are just like a death penatly to me.

Yes I second that.

 

[rockin'robin]

Taking mental illness out of the picture, what would happen to pharmaceutical companies if a prisoner died as a result of this testing -- especially if they did not agree to participate? Pharmaceutical companies would have all kinds of liability issues.

Right!...So they must get consent first! But they can and do....test on animals without their "consent"!...It's horrific!...These animals! Some may say these animals are from the shelter and are "gonna dry anyway" They're not wanted!....Hence, death row/lifers are gonna die in prison anyway! BUT, they can consent! Or not consent!

I've never seen an animal put his name on the dotted line to "consent" to these testings!! It's no laughing matter to me. We all are God's creatures, we have a right to be here and to be treated humanly.

Instead of "paying" thousands of dollars to get people off the street to agree to these testings, we could use that $$ to spay and neuter. We control our human population with birth control. We can do the same with animals.

 

[Hear Again]

I've never seen an animal put his name on the dotted line to "consent" to these testings!! It's no laughing matter to me. We all are God's creatures, we have a right to be here and to be treated humanly.

I feel differently than you do about animal testing.

My mother died of pancreatic cancer while my father died from diabetic and heart related complications, so I'm of the opinion that animals should be used to find cures for diseases that do not currently have satisfactory treatments.

You and I will have to agree to disagree on this subject.

 

[jillio]

I do see ur point! But, suppose something goes wrong with you? And I do agree, that the testing is imperative to anyone who has a disease. Suppose you agreed to the testing, and for some reason it affected ur brain, caused you to become crippled, etc. These experimental drugs can affect people in mysterious ways!...And the FDA knows it. Say, you were a normal person, with a job, family, etc. And agreed to the testing...something went haywire and you are seriously sick, brain damaged, etc. It happens!...

I know there are many studies asking people to participate in these studies. And I do agree, they are needed!! A couple thousands of dollars and "free" medical care....after the fact....doesn't cut it with me! The damage has already been done even if it's years down the road.

It has to be done, I also agree. And all in all, I was just suggesting that death row/lifers in prison, in my opinion, are the ones who should be tested IF they agreed to it. No force whatsoever!....They have no job, no life outside a prison cell, they don't vote (I don't believe so)....And they would be giving something back to society that they took away to begin with, such as murder.

That is why any participant in these studies must be able to give voluntary, informed consent. They are told of the possible risks prior to participation.

 

[jillio]

Right!...So they must get consent first! But they can and do....test on animals without their "consent"!...It's horrific!...These animals! Some may say these animals are from the shelter and are "gonna dry anyway" They're not wanted!....Hence, death row/lifers are gonna die in prison anyway! BUT, they can consent! Or not consent!

I've never seen an animal put his name on the dotted line to "consent" to these testings!! It's no laughing matter to me. We all are God's creatures, we have a right to be here and to be treated humanly.

Instead of "paying" thousands of dollars to get people off the street to agree to these testings, we could use that $$ to spay and neuter. We control our human population with birth control. We can do the same with animals.

Human testing does not take away the need for animal testing, or vice versa. You really do need to learn a bit about the testing for medicines and medical procedures. Of course animals don't give consent. In order to give informed consent, one has to be able to understand the information that is given. An animal can't do that. They don't give consent for people to dress them in cute little dresses,either, but people do it anyway.

 

[Buffalo]

Seems like Robin wants extra punishment by making the prisoners sick from medical testing.

I thought cruel and unusual punishment was also prohibited.

rockin'robin made it quite clear it is on volunteering basis. I am with rockin'robin on this. I don't want the prisoner to leave the prison so it would be best if there is a medical room in the prison. No favors/money for the prisoners just like those volunteers outside the prison. It would be perfect for a prisoner to make an amend - if one took a life so one can save many lives to make up for it.

I don't like animal research because their bodies are different than humans. Like there is west nile virus vaccine for equines (horses, donkeys, zebras, etc) but none for the humans. Rats cannot burp (the Rat Report) and what if the medicine can save humans from deadly disease causes burping. We miss out the medicine that can save humans. And you hear about certain medicine being withdrawed due to too many human deaths (Thalidomide
for an example).

I am glad that this is changing with better technology in medical research. More on this: PCRM >> Research: Alternatives to Animal Experimentation, Dissection, Research, Non-animal methods in Medical Education.

 

[Hear Again]

That is why any participant in these studies must be able to give voluntary, informed consent. They are told of the possible risks prior to participation.

Right. People who conduct research studies are required to advise participants of the risks involved with the study given the fact that they are bound by law not to cause physical or mental harm.

 

[Lighthouse77]

On one hand, I don't think the "freedom" of a choice is quite the same between a free person and a prisoner. Consider this scenario:
"Free person, if you agree to this, we will compensate you with 100 dollars."
"Prisoner, if you agree to this, we will shorten your parole, give you a TV, allow more visitation rights, and so on"
With free people, it's hard to exploit their needs. But with prisoners, it is, oh, so easy.

On the other hand though, the same thing can be said about the poor people. They need money desperately, so the companies can also easily exploit this need (coercion) to get volunteers.

Jillio's point (post #7) about the costs and risks outweighing the benefits is a very good argument, so I'm leaning towards no. There probably can be special cases such as a death row prisoner with cancer and so on.

My mother wanted to do so many trial research for cancer.. sadly all of it had to be paid out of her pocket. She had breast cancer medicaid and they only covered approved treatments.

 

[Jiro]

rockin'robin made it quite clear it is on volunteering basis. I am with rockin'robin on this. I don't want the prisoner to leave the prison so it would be best if there is a medical room in the prison. No favors/money for the prisoners just like those volunteers outside the prison. It would be perfect for a prisoner to make an amend - if one took a life so one can save many lives to make up for it.

I don't like animal research because their bodies are different than humans. Like there is west nile virus vaccine for equines (horses, donkeys, zebras, etc) but none for the humans. Rats cannot burp (the Rat Report) and what if the medicine can save humans from deadly disease causes burping. We miss out the medicine that can save humans. And you hear about certain medicine being withdrawed due to too many human deaths (Thalidomide
for an example).

I am glad that this is changing with better technology in medical research. More on this: PCRM >> Research: Alternatives to Animal Experimentation, Dissection, Research, Non-animal methods in Medical Education.

sorry but the reason why you're well and alive and same for your families and children are because of animal research.

btw - burping is not a medical illness or disease. it's natural process. Same with farting, peeing, shitting, sweating.

 

[Hear Again]

And you hear about certain medicine being withdrawed due to too many human deaths (Thalidomide for an example).

That isn't true. In 1998 the FDA approved the use of Thalidomide for the treatment of lesions associated with Erythema Nodosum Leprosum (ENL), so it is still being used here in the U.S.

 

[Hear Again]

My mother wanted to do so many trial research for cancer.. sadly all of it had to be paid out of her pocket. She had breast cancer medicaid and they only covered approved treatments.

Expecting Medicaid to pay for unproven treatments is wrong. Imagine how much money would be wasted on treatments that have not been proven effective not to mention the possibility of death for those who participate. I'm glad Medicaid doesn't authorize payment for research treatments because doing so is a waste of taxpayer money.

 

[Hwy99]

Yes, and also Josef Mengelé as well.. what and how he did to children with different races especially twins...

*nods* It was cold...

Yes I second that.

sorry but the reason why you're well and alive and same for your families and children are because of animal research.

btw - burping is not a medical illness or disease. it's natural process. Same with farting, peeing, shitting, sweating.

That's why I don't complain if the prisoners do the experiments testing, they have done much terrible thing to us, but if there is a experiments testing that they can do for us, they have something good to offer for us the world outside the prison.

 

[Buffalo]

sorry but the reason why you're well and alive and same for your families and children are because of animal research.

btw - burping is not a medical illness or disease. it's natural process. Same with farting, peeing, shitting, sweating.

Rats really cannot burp. They can fart though. What if the experiment medicine's side effect is burping? They would scrape that medicine and what if that medicine is the right one to save humans' lives???

 

[Buffalo]

That isn't true. In 1998 the FDA approved the use of Thalidomide for the treatment of lesions associated with Erythema Nodosum Leprosum (ENL), so it is still being used here in the U.S.

Quote from PCRM >> Research >> Animal Experimentation Issues >> Dangerous Medicine: Examples of Animal-Based “Safety” Tests Gone Wrong

Perhaps the most famous teratogen, this drug was given to pregnant women in the 1950’s to control nausea, causing more than 10,000 births with limb-reduction defects. After thalidomide was withdrawn from the market, tests in pregnant mice, rats, and guinea pigs were negative; finally, one strain of rabbit (the New Zealand white rabbit) was found to be susceptible. Cats, hamsters, rats, and mice were later found to be sensitive only to extremely high doses.

It was taken off the shelf back then. Maybe it is being used now as long as the female patient knows not to get pregnant.