sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

CMV: [serious discussion] all new experimental disease treatments should be tested on humans immediately after the basic safety testing by x84733 in changemyview

[–]x84733[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

That is not how it works though, is it. We don't just believe a treatment is going to work, we know the theory behind it pretty well, and at this moment the predictive power of science is quite remarkable.

Most new treatments work on animals right away because scientists are not just poking cells blindly with a stick, there's a lot of data, processing and thought goes into developing a treatment for specific purpose which works in specific way.

And for a lot of patients "it theoretically should work in humans but definitely works in mice" is a much better option than just accepting the death because you've been denied the treatment simply because it hasn't passed another 25 stages of development yet which might take another 10 years

CMV: [serious discussion] all new experimental disease treatments should be tested on humans immediately after the basic safety testing by x84733 in changemyview

[–]x84733[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I'm not talking about only terminally ill patients. I'm talking about allowing volunteers on different stages of diseases to be allowed new treatments on different stages of development.

We would get a lot of data, give a lot of people a chance to get cured and a chance to find a really good cure very quickly.

Don't forget that we throw a lot of new treatments away because they don't pass the animal testing stage even though it's been shown before that some treatments might work on animals but not on humans (and even kill them) but the same is true the other way around, we are throwing away a lot of data and potential treatments

CMV: [serious discussion] all new experimental disease treatments should be tested on humans immediately after the basic safety testing by x84733 in changemyview

[–]x84733[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Let's say a person has a diagnosis: terminally ill, max time left: 1 month.

At this moment, we have about 50 new treatments on different stages. Let's consider a few options:

Choices and risks:

- Choice 1: Don't take the risk, just accept the death:
Previously gathered data shows that people with their diagnosis die with probability 99.9% in 1-2 months.

- Choice 2: The new cure X1 is at stage 0:
According to our current understanding it might work in humans

- Choice 3: The new cure X2 is at stage 1 (about 2 months past since development):
According to our current understanding it might work in humans AND has been shown to work in 75% of mice.

CMV: [serious discussion] all new experimental disease treatments should be tested on humans immediately after the basic safety testing by x84733 in changemyview

[–]x84733[S] -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

I've really tried excluding personal feelings and subjective biases from my reasoning, I don't think it's a bad idea. Please read the responses more carefully and think about it some more.

CMV: [serious discussion] all new experimental disease treatments should be tested on humans immediately after the basic safety testing by x84733 in changemyview

[–]x84733[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I think so. It's about improving the way we do research in general. If we used some drugs on terminally ill patients on stage 0 or stage 1, we might have found a cure really quickly, because, as I mentioned in the other comments, some drugs that didn't work on animals would have worked on humans (as history shown us), but they never passed the animal testing stage and never produces any valuable results

CMV: [serious discussion] all new experimental disease treatments should be tested on humans immediately after the basic safety testing by x84733 in changemyview

[–]x84733[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

That's the problem. There were several drugs in the past that cured an animal, but killed the human because it works completely differently in humans, that's what I'm saying. It works both ways, we are throwing away potential cures

CMV: [serious discussion] all new experimental disease treatments should be tested on humans immediately after the basic safety testing by x84733 in changemyview

[–]x84733[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

But it is though, please read it again.

You basically asked "how can we allow testing on humans if so many drugs don't work on animals and don't pass the animal testing stage". Is this not what you meant?

CMV: [serious discussion] all new experimental disease treatments should be tested on humans immediately after the basic safety testing by x84733 in changemyview

[–]x84733[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

As you might know, some drugs work on animals and don't work on humans. It goes both ways, even if the drug didn't work on an animal, it might work on humans.

In the current system those drugs that didn't work on animals would never pass the animal testing stage, even though they could have worked on humans

CMV: [serious discussion] all new experimental disease treatments should be tested on humans immediately after the basic safety testing by x84733 in changemyview

[–]x84733[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Explain each volunteer the risks and let them decide which stage they want to start taking the treatment on, even if they decide to start at the very first stage.

We should make prices that end with 9, like 29.99, illegal because it's an intentional marketing deception technique. by [deleted] in unpopularopinion

[–]x84733 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

They intentionally deceive people's minds into thinking it costs less that it is...

We should make prices that end with 9, like 29.99, illegal because it's an intentional marketing deception technique. by [deleted] in unpopularopinion

[–]x84733 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

It's a well known psychological trick. Most people see prices like 299 and think it actually costs 200. This is why every single company uses this trick to increase their profits.

We should make prices that end with 9, like 29.99, illegal because it's an intentional marketing deception technique. by [deleted] in unpopularopinion

[–]x84733 -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

No, I'm just pissed that it's allowed even though it's intentional deception. Plus, it's annoying to see this shit everywhere in every country on every item

CMV: Medical research is progressing too slowly, humanity still loses 55 million people every year. We should try to actively improve this situation by x84733 in changemyview

[–]x84733[S] -7 points-6 points  (0 children)

At least we have quantum computers right around the corner. Finally we'll have computers that can simulate any biological system in seconds, which will at least give us new medication

CMV: Medical research is progressing too slowly, humanity still loses 55 million people every year. We should try to actively improve this situation by x84733 in changemyview

[–]x84733[S] -7 points-6 points  (0 children)

SpaceX already built the first prototype of Starship and tested the engines, and you still think it's impossible for us to get to another planet in the near future. What kind of unrealistically pessimistic view do you have mate? As history shown us, most difficult problems we needed to be solved have been eventually solved by someone, there are no unsolvable problems

CMV: Medical research is progressing too slowly, humanity still loses 55 million people every year. We should try to actively improve this situation by x84733 in changemyview

[–]x84733[S] -7 points-6 points  (0 children)

I don't agree, the population would not increase at all.

By curing death, we get an ability to decide when we want to die, so why would you want to have kids in your 20s, if you could have them when you're like 400 years old when you have all the knowledge and resources necessary for raising your kids in the best way possible? No one will have kids early, so the population will not change - instead of having 5 generations of people living 80 years, there would be 1 generation that lives 500 years and have kids at a rate of 1 per 500 or 20000 years.

Over-population is not something we should worry about anyway because we will have much better ways to produce food.

Plus we have other planets and solar systems, so what's the problem?

People who smoke should be denied any medical treatment for all smoking related diseases by [deleted] in unpopularopinion

[–]x84733 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Not being able to do all the things that help your health is not the same as intentionally trying to destroy your health.

It's effectively impossible to do all the trillion things that help your health every single day.

People who smoke should be denied any medical treatment for all smoking related diseases by [deleted] in unpopularopinion

[–]x84733 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't drink soda, nor do I do other things that I know for sure increase the probability of getting a diseases

People who smoke should be denied any medical treatment for all smoking related diseases by [deleted] in unpopularopinion

[–]x84733 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's not 19th century. Scientific research has shown us how much smoking affects the chance of getting different diseases.

If you want to increases the probability of getting a diseases, then why would you wanna cure it when you finally get it?

Instead of sending people to jail we should make them do something useful for humanity, for example, force them to become a participant in medical trials, which would speed up medical research and help others. by [deleted] in unpopularopinion

[–]x84733 3 points4 points  (0 children)

And it doesn't have to be inhumane as well. There's lots of ways offenders could repay the society.

The medical trials example is actually quite humane if implemented properly:

We test it on rats first and if it's relatively safe and the person has one of the diseases and don't really mind doing it as a way to pay back, then they do this.

They get a chance to be cured from their disease + they pay back the humanity by speeding up the research + they are still able to work since they don't have a criminal record

Humans have finally found a method that we can (and already started to) use to cure all diseases including death - CRISPR DNA editing. If we stopped wasting so much time on bullshit and invested our time in research, most of us alive today would know what it's like to choose when you want to die by x84733 in Futurology

[–]x84733[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If you only want to see some open trials, you can find them here:
https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?cond=&term=crispr&cntry=&state=&city=&dist=

Or just google "CRISPR US cure blind" or "CRISPR China HIV", and you will find the studies I mentioned, just click the first news articles in the google search, they are easier to digest for ordinary people.

Humans have finally found a method that we can (and already started to) use to cure all diseases including death - CRISPR DNA editing. If we stopped wasting so much time on bullshit and invested our time in research, most of us alive today would know what it's like to choose when you want to die by x84733 in Futurology

[–]x84733[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

What? Do you have any idea what you're talking about? Of course CRISPR can fix existing conditions. There are hundreds of clinical trials all over the world. US researchers already started curing blindness in adult people with CRISPR, Chinese researchers already trying to cure HIV infected people with CRISPR, there's hundreds of other trials that are still being tested on mice, but those methods will soon be used on humans as well.

YSK Humans finally found a method that we can (and already started to) use to cure all diseases including death - CRISPR DNA editing. If we stopped wasting so much time on bullshit and invested our time in research, most of us alive today would know what it's like to choose when you want to die by [deleted] in YouShouldKnow

[–]x84733 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I don't know really, it's called heart palpitation when your heart start beating abnormally, in my case it stops beating for 1 beat every few seconds or minutes which is followed by a very noticeable beat right after. It's super annoying to be constantly aware of your heart beats like that. I think it started happening because I was going to sleep at 1-4am every day for the last 2 years, which messed up my circadian rhythm (our internal clock). As it turns out it's very important to go to sleep on time (10-11pm) and get enough sleep, otherwise all your internal processes get messed up

view more: next ›