I got the impression someone objected to the use of untested medical theories in practice, as that would be 'an abuse of those who are first to receive unproven treatments'. Maybe I misunderstood,...
Type: Posts; User: fiver; Keyword(s):
I got the impression someone objected to the use of untested medical theories in practice, as that would be 'an abuse of those who are first to receive unproven treatments'. Maybe I misunderstood,...
I didn't disagree with what you wrote, your suggestions. :) I don't see how trial and error is avoidable. The scientific process comes up with theories about how things such as our bodies work. These...
Harpy, as I see it you're trying to argue around this point I made earlier:
Of course, we should try to do as much research as we can before ANY pre-clinical or clinical trial. But......
NO! Absolutely not.
There must a problem with my communication then, because I have tried to correct this faulty perception of my statements numerous times.
If two people are facing...
Which is precisely the type of scenario that Harpy and I were discussing - "burning houses", terminal illnesses.
No, it's not a different argument. That is a fine example of medical...
I don't have anything else to add. I don't agree that such a treatment would be exploitative. Given two people in the same predicament, neither of whom is there because they were treated with...
I don't agree that such a treatment would be exploitative. If someone is already in a "burning house", or has a terminal illness then they already face imminent death if nothing is done. You imply...
Fair point. In the second statement I refer to an experimental therapy which is applied with the express purpose of helping the subject of the experiment (as opposed to doing nothing and letting them...
Harpy, PLEASE! :p How can you extract that from my last post? My first statement says 'no experiments on ANY human or animal merely to benefit others'. My second statement applies equally to both...
I'll have one last go at clarifying what I wrote:
I don't believe that any human or animal should be used merely as a tool to benefit others. I don't believe anyone should be made a guinea pig in...
Yes, 'fire' can be understood both literally and metaphorically. Either way, Harpy implied that my RIGHTS view allows for the exploitation of the mentally impaired:
This is VERY insulting and...
I have no idea how you interpreted what I wrote as excusing setting mentally impaired individuals on fire. Re-read - 'an emergency scenario ... in which no individual has been placed in that...
While I agree with your assertion that the results of experiments performed upon animals are not always applicable to humans, it seems an undeniable implication of any anti-testing argument which...
A cancer sufferer with no other chance of recovery is hesitant to undergo an experimental therapy, without knowing whether it will cure them, worsen their condition or kill them. Hands up those who...
No. According to an animal RIGHTS rather than WELFARE position, we must emphasise the ethical IMPERATIVE of treating past and present self-aware individuals with respect. We fail to treat them with...
Good question. I tend to agree that welfarist reforms are attractive to people because it is unlikely that a mass change of consciousness will occur. However, as attractive as they seem I have...