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 : The Trump Presidency -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: i-node who wrote (164737)	5/19/2020 5:20:00 PM
From: Lane3	1 Recommendation Recommended By CentralParkRanger Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 361782

I don't even comprehend your point. It is not different from clinical trials for cancer. A sick person comes in, they agree to participate in the clinical trial, and they are randomized into one of multiple treatment options. Which may [or may not] include placebo. No, it is different, utterly different. Once again I will demonstrate how it is different. As you say, in cancer trials, a sick person comes in. If that sick person ends up in the control group he will not get better. If he ends up in the treatment group, he may get better or maybe the drug doesn't work and he doesn't get better. Either way, he is not likely harmed, although it's possible that someone in the treatment group might suffer some side effects. Nothing happens to the subjects in the control group so none of them is harmed. First do no harm. That's the situation you have stuck in your head--a trial to prove a drug works to help the already sick persons who participate. That is, indeed, the extant paradigm. Now shift gears into a different paradigm, which I will describe. The question on the table in this discussion is an RCT for a drug that is not intended to cure sick persons who enter the trial, as described above, but rather hypothesized to prevent healthy persons from becoming sick, from catching the disease. Now, how can that be proven? Well, you give people in the treatment group the drug, then expose them to the sickness--give them the opportunity to contract the disease--to see if the drug stops them catching it. You cannot prove that a drug stops people from catching a disease unless you expose them to the disease in a controlled manner and see what happens. To prove that the drug prevents the virus from infecting the subject, both the treatment and control groups would have to be dosed with covid. As you said in your previous post: No one infects anyone with HCQ in the course of a clinical trial. Infecting people with anything during clinical trials is not done. Indeed, it's not done (1) because that's generally not what trials are about. They're about validating drug cures, not drug prophylaxis. If you want to validate prophylaxis, you have to try to infect the subjects, to enable the subject to contract it. No other way to see if the drug stops the infection. It's also not done (2) as a matter of ethics.