So, anyone taken part in clinical trials?

[mattSV]

Does tazering yourself count as a clinical trial?

A friend of a friend got £2000 for an afternoon's "work" doing this (take some pills and have some electrodes wired up to you). Spent it on a 2nd hand Hornet
600

My prediction is following this story, very few people will sign up.
It's like holidaying in the places affected by the tsunami shortly afterwards; no more likely to get hit by one (and in this instance, the clampdown/investigation will probably make it safer than it was before), yet the price will work in the favour of those willing to go.

Originally Posted by cuffy

Why instead of using "joe public" as human guinea pigs, why dont they use paedo's, murderers n rapists...that way anything bad happens..so be it..no one would give a stuff...like in a earlier thread i said about banning fox hunting and replacing the fox with a paedo, swap the hounds for a rabid pack of snarling rotties, would make for a great afternoon oin the country side

now pondering a life in politics

pmsl

bloody good point though! however the sticking point would be "human rights" as demanded by Blair witch and all the other pc do gooding tossers!

[timwilky]

I had a friend (Note past tense) who as a medical student took part in a number of trials. A number of years after he qualified and became a doctor he developed terrible depression which eventually led to an overdose at the age of 35 His mother asked was it a cry for help. The answer was no he was a doctor and took 10 times the lethal dose so he definately wanted to die.

Over the years of his depression, he blaimed it on the trials he had taken part in. Was it one drug, a combination etc. The problem being very little information was available especially if the trials were considered a failure nad the drug never making it to market.

Why did he take part in the trials, he was paid. the princely sum of £25 for a square inch of his backside. they could stick anything in it for what was then a weeks beer money. I had hoped that trials were far better conducted but evidence this weeks seems to show that the pre human trials needs more work.

Question. Will the disaster of this week lead to more animal testing as obviously not enough work was done. or to less as the trials had failed to demonstrate side effects and therefore it is obvious animal testing is an inefficient method of testing human drugs?.


It occurs to me that Kevins parents must be going through hell at the moment, recent news about the "Elephant Man" drug trials must have brought back terrible memories of his Kevins depression and subsequent death. Incidently some time ago I posted about a couple being hit by a speeding motorist who panicked when he saw a speed camera, mounted the pavement and smashed into them. This couple was Kevins parents.

[embee]

Originally Posted by timwilky

I ....... he was paid. the princely sum of £25 for a square inch of his backside. they could stick anything in it for what was then a weeks beer money...........

No, no, no, no, no, no, no,..........................

Nah, never, don't want to either, even if this hadn't happened, I'm too scared of things.

Originally Posted by mattSV

Does tazering yourself count as a clinical trial?

LOL We've done that. I remember when my mate had a brace and we massed about with the power packs in science class, we put about 60V through his brace and he burned his mouth pmsl.

Reading about this.

£2000 a go is a lot of money...especially if your desperate or not rich.

Some guy made £60,000 just by doing trials

That is a lot of lolly and not to be dismissed lightly. And for sitting on your backside too. Yes the risks can be great but that sort of cash will always find takers.

Originally Posted by timwilky

I had a friend (Note past tense) who as a medical student took part in a number of trials.

Just being picky but if he took place in many trials why does that article blame his death on a single drug which obviously was passed safe to use in that trial cos it is prescribed today.

[timwilky]

Liz, I think journalistic licence was used in the article I linked to. It uses the plurals "tests" and "experimental drugs", yet as you note only names one.

Kevin had real problems trying to establish exactly what he had been given. Where a drug fails a test, little information is forthcoming in terms of the side effects etc. As there obviously is no attempt to obtain a license for use.

Kevin was used for testing of Beta Interferon. But in what doses etc. I don't know and he had been unable to establish. Kevin was a friend from my schooldays and I still recall the phonecall from his elder brother saying "The silly bugger has topped himself".

I still think human drug tests have to be conducted. But it must be at the end of development cycle, the people volunteering for tests must be made fully aware of potential risks and the big drug companies not shirk their responsibilities towards supporting people who may have been harmed as a result of trials.

Originally Posted by timwilky

I still think human drug tests have to be conducted. But it must be at the end of development cycle, the people volunteering for tests must be made fully aware of potential risks and the big drug companies not shirk their responsibilities towards supporting people who may have been harmed as a result of trials.

I wasn't trying to make light of this persons situation or the current one in the news i just wondered why they mention a now licensed drug it just seems a bit wierd.

And i completely agree with you that human drugs test must be done (probably because i work in the area of microbiological research and the production and testing of drugs, so i'm a bit biased) i also agree that there should be tighter controls on the people who carry out, and take part in these trials. Who knows what harm some of these tests may have caused, you only have to look at some of the evidence of the tests done by the MOD on troops in the 40's and 50's and the current law suit to see there will be trouble ahead.