Should We Use Experimental Drugs on Prisoners?

[rockin'robin]

I was watching on of my favorite TV shows, Judge Judy (hehe)...and the plaintiff was sueing his Mother for several thousands of dollars that she was withholding from him. He said that he earned the $$ by taking experimental drugs, not yet approved by the FDA, ($10,000) total!

He was 23 yrs. old, but looked older, and his demeanor was kind of weird also!

I was wondering...is this legal?....I know we have animal testing...but humans?

After much thought on this, I wonder why not use these drugs on death row prisoners?....As long as they agreed to it!...They have nothing to lose...and only $$, to buy their needs or give to their families when they are gone.

 

[Bottesini]

A lot of testing on humans is on terminally ill people to test specific drugs for their illness.

It won't work with just a random sampling of death row inmates.

 

[Oceanbreeze]

There are also clinical trials on healthy people for medications as well. Usually though, volunteers are paid for their participation in the studies.

So, yes, it's legal. As for experimentation on prisoners, I have never heard of that, but I don't think it would be ethical.

I also wouldn't put a lot of stock in what you see on shows like Judge Judy. A show like that is on the air purely for entertainment purposes only.

 

[Jolie77]

Mod's Note:

The thread has been moved to it's proper location.

 

[jillio]

We have laws against such.

 

[shel90]

If the prisoners willing sign any legal documents granting permission for that, then more power to them. I am not sure what the code of ethics are involving this kind of thing.

 

[jillio]

If the prisoners willing sign any legal documents granting permission for that, then more power to them. I am not sure what the code of ethics are involving this kind of thing.

The Code of Ethics requires that any participant in any form of experimental study be able to give fully informed consent. Therefore, we cannot order prisoners to engage in experimental studies. In fact, there was a time that we used prisoners for such purposes. It was found not only to be unethical, but illegal, as well.

There are other problems with using prisoners in an experimental study, as well. These studies require controlled conditions, comparison groups, etc. The prison population is a specific group, and cannot be used as representative of the population as a whole. When these studies are done, every effort is made to insure that the participants are representative of the population. Otherwise, results are not generalizable.

Also, there is the issue of location. These studies are done, most often, in conjunction with services provided by large teaching hospitals. The environment and follow up can be contolled. Prisoners would have to be transported to the study location, often on a daily basis, in order to participate. That means that guards would have to transport and stay with them during the study. The presence of the guards could serve to skew results in some types of studies.

 

[rockin'robin]

I would much rather see it done on prisoners than animals, of course. And I would not agree to be "tested" or be a "guinea pig" for testing, no matter the money involved!

It's kind of scary to know that there are people walking around with "experimental drugs" in their system! Not approved by the FDA.

As for Judge Judy....a lot of her "old school" teachings ring true!..She's a tough old lady! With a lot of common sense.

Regarding prisoners:.....



Prisoners are excluded from clinical trials and are often prohibited from getting experimental drugs. The reason is that for years, the US did many drug, psychological and other studies, often extremely cruel ones, on prisoners. One study involved starving prisoners for many weeks to see if they would experience psychological damage.

As a result of protest over these inhumane policies, the Federal government and local governments have forbidden research on prisoners. This policy is often used as an excuse to deny prisoners adequate medical care, including experimental therapies. Prisoners should not be used as human guinea pigs, but they should have the right to receive AZT DHPG, etc.


I just goggled it...from the FDA handbook regarding prisoners....

 

[jillio]

I would much rather see it done on prisoners than animals, of course. And I would not agree to be "tested" or be a "guinea pig" for testing, no matter the money involved!

It's kind of scary to know that there are people walking around with "experimental drugs" in their system! Not approved by the FDA.

As for Judge Judy....a lot of her "old school" teachings ring true!..She's a tough old lady! With a lot of common sense.

Human testing doesn't rule out the need for animal testing. Animal testing is the first step. When that is completed, human trials begin. Drugs have to be shown to be relatively safe before they can be tested on humans.

If it weren't for those "experimental drugs" many people wouldn't be walking around at all. They would be dead.

 

[Jiro]

In fact, there was a time that we used prisoners for such purposes.

yep.... usually to study the effect of a weaponized-version of biological/chemical agent on human being.

 

[jillio]

yep.... usually to study the effect of a weaponized-version of biological/chemical agent on human being.

Yep. And it turned into a death sentence for some that were only sentenced to a few years.

 

[Cheri]

I would much rather see it done on prisoners than animals, of course. And I would not agree to be "tested" or be a "guinea pig" for testing, no matter the money involved!.

And what would happen if prisoners were tested, and then side effects becomes complicated, they suffered mentally and becomes more violent, it may lead them to more future crimes. I believe that's dangerous if you ask me. lol

 

[Jiro]

And what would happen if prisoners were tested, and then side effects becomes complicated, they suffered mentally and becomes more violent, it may lead them to more future crimes. I believe that's dangerous if you ask me. lol

what crimes? they're already in prison lol

 

[Cheri]

what crimes? they're already in prison lol

You don't think they can kill others in prison?

 

[Jiro]

You don't think they can kill others in prison?

IMO - it's hardly a concern for me. sorry for my twisted view . i mean they're all criminals. they're expected to do stuff among each other. A thief prisoner will steal stuff from other prisoner. A murderer prisoner will murder other. A rapist prisoner will rape other. et cetera...

 

[naisho]

On experimental drugs in prisoners..
How about the innocent that are jailed?
And the ones on deathrow too?

 

[rockin'robin]

I meant "death row prisoners"...those who have been convicted beyond a shadow of doubt! Anybody in prison is gonna say "I didn't do it"!...But for those prisoners that have been tried and tried again, and found guilty and AGREE to be tested with experimental drugs, why not?....what have they got to lose? They are gonna die anyway, just a matter of time!...And they can give something back to the society that they wronged in the beginning!

Animals cannot "sign their consent"! Humans can! So, yes, I'm against animal testing!...But on death row prisoners, I would say "yes"!...Perhaps they could be relocated, (those that agreed) to the testing...and give them more "priviledges"...a "better view" with a window! Even on the water! It would benefit everyone!....Then we could concentrate on the helpless animals and set up more Free Clinics for spay and nueturing!! Would cut down on the animal population also.

 

[jillio]

I meant "death row prisoners"...those who have been convicted beyond a shadow of doubt! Anybody in prison is gonna say "I didn't do it"!...But for those prisoners that have been tried and tried again, and found guilty and AGREE to be tested with experimental drugs, why not?....what have they got to lose? They are gonna die anyway, just a matter of time!...And they can give something back to the society that they wronged in the beginning!

Animals cannot "sign their consent"! Humans can! So, yes, I'm against animal testing!...But on death row prisoners, I would say "yes"!...Perhaps they could be relocated, (those that agreed) to the testing...and give them more "priviledges"...a "better view" with a window! Even on the water! It would benefit everyone!....Then we could concentrate on the helpless animals and set up more Free Clinics for spay and nueturing!! Would cut down on the animal population also.

The bolded is called "coersion". Totally nullifies the concept of freely offered informed consent.

 

[rockin'robin]

The bolded is called "coersion". Totally nullifies the concept of freely offered informed consent.

Perhaps!...but are we offering animals an "informed consent"??...'Course not! So, instead, we're offering people walking our streets $$$ to agree to the testing!..And to be fair...we could offer death row prisoners a few more "priviledges"....To begin with, this man made $10,000 to agree to the testing. And he could make a lot more since he was only 23!...say he took 50 testings! That's $500,00! He doesn't have to work! And if he becomes sick, then the government has to take care of his medical issues....It's gonna cost us MORE in the long run there!

 

[Jiro]

I meant "death row prisoners"...those who have been convicted beyond a shadow of doubt! Anybody in prison is gonna say "I didn't do it"!...But for those prisoners that have been tried and tried again, and found guilty and AGREE to be tested with experimental drugs, why not?....what have they got to lose? They are gonna die anyway, just a matter of time!...And they can give something back to the society that they wronged in the beginning!

Animals cannot "sign their consent"! Humans can! So, yes, I'm against animal testing!...But on death row prisoners, I would say "yes"!...Perhaps they could be relocated, (those that agreed) to the testing...and give them more "priviledges"...a "better view" with a window! Even on the water! It would benefit everyone!....Then we could concentrate on the helpless animals and set up more Free Clinics for spay and nueturing!! Would cut down on the animal population also.

Perhaps!...but are we offering animals an "informed consent"??...'Course not! So, instead, we're offering people walking our streets $$$ to agree to the testing!..And to be fair...we could offer death row prisoners a few more "priviledges"....To begin with, this man made $10,000 to agree to the testing. And he could make a lot more since he was only 23!...say he took 50 testings! That's $500,00! He doesn't have to work! And if he becomes sick, then the government has to take care of his medical issues....It's gonna cost us MORE in the long run there!

see Jillio's post #7. Prison is an uncontrolled environment for medical study. It's a security risk and cost-prohibitive to have a secured, controlled environment for prisoners in order to conduct a study. It's much much much cheaper and simpler to conduct study on volunteers than prisoners.

and no the government does not have to take care of his medical issues because by signing the agreements, he's aware of this risk. Beside - how are you going to prove that his illness is the result of the testing? Good luck proving it. Medical sector is not that stupid. They have been doing this for hundreds of years.