AIDS
There is a fatal flaw in modern western medicine, something that demonstrates the issues between utilitarianism and socialism.
I was watching the program on aids and the key fact seemed to be that they actually have a vaccine - that is they can cripple the aids virus and give it to people and that this leads to immunity to the virus.
But no one wants to try it. Why? because they are scared that it will mutate into a full blown aids virus - now the risks may outweigh the possible gains in the US (they did not in the case of polio or any other vaccine but they MIGHT) but in Botswana where apparently 80% of males will become infected anyway - how is it conceivable that the risks outweigh the possible gains of the irradiation of the virus? Even if it does go wrong the thousands killed can easily be outweighed by the hundreds of millions that could be saved.
But modern medicine sees it differently they are too scared to trial medicines on humans and to do tests on people. It is UN ethical or inhumane. But why do we value action so much over inaction? But every day that they wait to do an experiment (if it will indeed work) they through inaction are partly responsible for another thousand or so deaths.
Wiling informed participation in experiments seems to be a complete non issue - there should be no need for years of testing on animals unless it is just to make it safe enough for the humans to be comfortable with it (of course one has to have a reasonable belief it is worth the net harm it is likely to do - but in aids vaccines it is a no brainier). Even forced "experiments" (like forcing people to take polio vaccines) may be reasonable.
I will probably sound like the PNAC here but it may take a disaster to force medicine to see the folly of their current strategy.
I was watching the program on aids and the key fact seemed to be that they actually have a vaccine - that is they can cripple the aids virus and give it to people and that this leads to immunity to the virus.
But no one wants to try it. Why? because they are scared that it will mutate into a full blown aids virus - now the risks may outweigh the possible gains in the US (they did not in the case of polio or any other vaccine but they MIGHT) but in Botswana where apparently 80% of males will become infected anyway - how is it conceivable that the risks outweigh the possible gains of the irradiation of the virus? Even if it does go wrong the thousands killed can easily be outweighed by the hundreds of millions that could be saved.
But modern medicine sees it differently they are too scared to trial medicines on humans and to do tests on people. It is UN ethical or inhumane. But why do we value action so much over inaction? But every day that they wait to do an experiment (if it will indeed work) they through inaction are partly responsible for another thousand or so deaths.
Wiling informed participation in experiments seems to be a complete non issue - there should be no need for years of testing on animals unless it is just to make it safe enough for the humans to be comfortable with it (of course one has to have a reasonable belief it is worth the net harm it is likely to do - but in aids vaccines it is a no brainier). Even forced "experiments" (like forcing people to take polio vaccines) may be reasonable.
I will probably sound like the PNAC here but it may take a disaster to force medicine to see the folly of their current strategy.
posted by Genius at 1:34 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home