Re: 20/20 Report on PolyHeme

I was just thinking of the JW's. But they probably wear some kind of ID notifying they not be given blood, at least I'd think so. I did read, I believe, that they can take this PolyHeme even though it is blood-based. They've been given permission - something about it is just parts of blood or something. SO, you'd think they as a group might be only too happy to allow it's use - as they'd refuse the whole blood or rbc transfusions that would otherwise be used.


Phyllis Nilsson wrote:
Strange, they had enough time to get consent from a Jehovah's Witness, but
not the general public. They had time to inform the Jehovah's Witness, but
don't have time to inform the rest of us. Strange, a study killed 51
patients, but this company is making the same ethical errors. I'd call
that secrecy.

Marsha wrote:



Here's a good article on the subject.
Especially interesting is the Jehovah's
Witness, from whom they did obtain
informed consent.

http://www.wired.com/news/medtech/0,1286,62955,00.html

"In 1998, a company called Baxter
Healthcare launched the first major
study of a blood substitute using the
loophole. According to news reports,
nearly half of 52 patients died and the
study was halted.

George Annas, a medical ethicist at
Boston University, criticized that study
and thinks the people behind PolyHeme
are making the same ethical errors. It's
wrong to "treat human beings like
animals, like laboratory animals," he
said. "People have a right not to be
research subjects. The right to opt out
by wearing a bracelet isn't enough, he
added, although he declined to offer a
better system. "It should be up to the
study sponsor to figure out how to do
the study ethically, not the people who
criticize the study."

A prominent advocate of patients' rights
says people should have to wear a
bracelet to get INTO the PolyHeme study,
not get out of it. There's simply no
proof that the artificial blood is safe,
said Vera Hassner Sharav, president and
founder of the New York-based Alliance
for Human Research Protection.
"Therefore, we shouldn't be testing it
in people who cannot say no."

I'm sure that not every accident victim
with blood loss is unconscious. The
medical professionals could obtain
consent from these people. It's just
not ethical to experiment on people
without consent, IMO.

Marsha/Ohio


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Top Ten Signs Youre a Fundamentalist Christian
    ... which separates us from God. ... The blood of Jesus literally ... :-) "There's power in the Blood, ... Mary doesn't seem to have given any consent. ...
    (rec.arts.drwho)
  • Re: drink driving question
    ... So the police would ask you to consent to them ... Assuming that the hospital ordered a blood alcohol test. ... I don't know how common they are. ... If the hospital did not perform the test, the police would ask you to ...
    (uk.legal)
  • Re: Fish oil and blood thinning
    ... It wasn't necessarily the thinner blood Andrea. ... occur when I wear a white shirt or I am in a position or ...
    (alt.support.diabetes)
  • Re: Helmets
    ... I hope you wear nice panties under your skirt. ... A mighty Hungarian warrior ... The blood of Attila runs through me ...
    (rec.skiing.alpine)
Quantcast