Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (255136)	6/21/2008 5:26:56 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793896

The Tuskegee outrage was real No, it wasn't, not as it is told by Jeremiah Wright et. al. The story that they tell to their congregations is that the Tuskegee doctors deliberately gave siphilis to their subjects. That is not true. The Tuskeegee doctors picked poor black farmers who already had tertiary siphilis in order to study the effects, telling them they were being treated for 'bad blood.' Since there was no effective treatment for tertiary syphilis, as far as I can tell the study was ethically within bounds when it began. Not telling the patient what he had if you couldn't treat it was routine in the 1930s across most of medicine - for example, cancer patients were almost never told they had cancer. Where the study went off the rails was when penicillin became available in the 1940s and they still didn't treat their patients, because they didn't want to lose their results. But it's still not the same as deliberately infecting healthy people. Perhaps somebody in the medical field can correct me if I'm missing something.