If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
wDnnSCPS
"Several studies that enlisted foster children reported that patients
suffered side effects such as rashes, vomiting and sharp drops in infection-fighting blood cells, and one reported a "disturbing" higher death rate among children who took higher doses of a drug, records show." |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
mountain bill wrote: "Several studies that enlisted foster children reported that patients suffered side effects such as rashes, vomiting and sharp drops in infection-fighting blood cells, and one reported a "disturbing" higher death rate among children who took higher doses of a drug, records show." I find it fascinating that you avoided posting the source, or a link to it. Too lazy, or are you, as usual, a laying twit that attempts to deceive? http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst-nws-aids05.html Here are a few other things the article mentions for a more balanced view. Notice I don't avoid showing both sides of the issue, as you twits do: "The research funded by the National Institutes of Health spanned the country. It was most widespread in the 1990s as foster care agencies sought treatments for their HIV-infected children that weren't yet available in the marketplace. The practice ensured that foster children-- mostly poor or minority-- received care from world-class researchers at government expense, slowing their rate of death and extending their lives. But it also exposed a vulnerable population to the risks of medical research and drugs that were known to have serious side effects in adults and for which the safety for children was unknown." And; "The government provided special protections for young wards in 1983. They required researchers and their oversight boards to appoint independent advocates for any foster child enrolled in a narrow class of studies that involved greater than minimal risk and lacked the promise of direct benefit. Some foster agencies required the protection regardless of risks and benefits." And; "Officials estimated that 5 percent to 10 percent of the 13,878 children enrolled in pediatric AIDS studies funded by NIH since the late 1980s were in foster care. More than two dozen Illinois foster children remain in studies today." And; "Researchers typically secured permission to enroll foster children through city or state agencies. And they frequently exempted themselves from appointing advocates by concluding the research carried minimal risk and the child would directly benefit because the drugs had already been tried in adults." And; "Those who made the decisions say the research gave foster kids access to drugs they otherwise couldn't get. And they say they protected the children's interest by carefully explaining risks and benefits to state guardians, foster parents and the children themselves." And, here's a big "oh!" for yah; "Illinois officials directly credit the decision to enroll HIV-positive foster kids with bringing about a decline in deaths-- from 40 between 1989 and 1995 to only 19 since." 0:- |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
mountain bill wrote: "Several studies that enlisted foster children reported that patients suffered side effects such as rashes, vomiting and sharp drops in infection-fighting blood cells, and one reported a "disturbing" higher death rate among children who took higher doses of a drug, records show." "To say as a group that foster children should be excluded from clinical trials would have meant excluding these children from the best available therapies at the time," he said. "From an ethical perspective, I never thought that was a stand I could take." |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
wrote in message
ups.com... mountain bill wrote: "Several studies that enlisted foster children reported that patients suffered side effects such as rashes, vomiting and sharp drops in infection-fighting blood cells, and one reported a "disturbing" higher death rate among children who took higher doses of a drug, records show." "To say as a group that foster children should be excluded from clinical trials would have meant excluding these children from the best available therapies at the time," he said. "From an ethical perspective, I never thought that was a stand I could take." It obviously doesn't matter to those who have no compassion, empathy and sympathy. It's just another attempt on their part to find a weak, defenseless opponent. Pop |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Trying to put a happy face on this one is
like painting a smiley face on the nosecone of an atomic bomb. It's like the "Arbeit Macht Frei" sign welded into the gateways of several Nazi death camps. (Work brings freedom or work makes freedom) The courts have already gotten involved, and a FOSTER Mom who refused to knuckle under to the pressure and threats from the agencies got the ball rolling. The rotten agencies thought they could steamroller this one and it WILL backfire severely. The failures that basically enabled the Foster kids to be used almost sadistically as Guinea Pigs for AIDS drugs were and are systemic evils. Did you think that the requirement that ADVOCATES be appointed to look out for the interests of each individual kid were a mere technicality? |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Greegor wrote: Trying to put a happy face on this one is like painting a smiley face on the nosecone of an atomic bomb. A "happy face" on AIDs treatment? Hardly, greegor. Your inability to connect with the needs of the children amply demonstrates your lack of compassion..your incapacity to feel empathy. It's like the "Arbeit Macht Frei" sign welded into the gateways of several Nazi death camps. (Work brings freedom or work makes freedom) The Jews and others targetted by the Nazis had a fatal illness? The courts have already gotten involved, and a FOSTER Mom who refused to knuckle under to the pressure and threats from the agencies got the ball rolling. The rotten agencies thought they could steamroller this one and it WILL backfire severely. My take from the article is that both camps have some credibility here, but you of course can see only one. Your usual. Those instances where the child's rights are not protected are of course the questionable issue being addressed. They problem though is this...as stated: do we have the right to deny child AIDS victims the latest medical help from the top health professionals in the field? Or did not you notice what a small percentage are actually foster children? The failures that basically enabled the Foster kids to be used almost sadistically as Guinea Pigs for AIDS drugs were and are systemic evils. Not unless that was the case. Why do you assume it was sadistic use, and that they were Guinea Pigs? And what is it about AIDS drugs that are inherently bad? They had been used on adults prior to being used on children. And the death rate dropped after the trials began. Did you think that the requirement that ADVOCATES be appointed to look out for the interests of each individual kid were a mere technicality? No, nor should anyone in the system. It's the only intelligent thing you've said so far, you sick little puke. It's rather obvious this at first got picked up by the less honest ... mmm ...shall we say, sensationalistic media, who ran with the gore, and distorted, and now we are seeing more thoughtful consideration of the children's risks, and their rights. Do you think those parents that submitted their children to the study using the latest in Tx drugs for AIDS were part of a sadistic attempt to have their own children used as guinea pigs? About 90% or so of the children involved where not foster children. Or didn't you notice? Why not write a letter to the editor and give them your opinion. It will be fun to see you make a public fool of yourself........again. 0:- |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
"Greegor" wrote in message oups.com... Trying to put a happy face on this one is like painting a smiley face on the nosecone of an atomic bomb. It's like the "Arbeit Macht Frei" sign welded into the gateways of several Nazi death camps. (Work brings freedom or work makes freedom) The courts have already gotten involved, and a FOSTER Mom who refused to knuckle under to the pressure and threats from the agencies got the ball rolling. The rotten agencies thought they could steamroller this one and it WILL backfire severely. The failures that basically enabled the Foster kids to be used almost sadistically as Guinea Pigs for AIDS drugs were and are systemic evils. Did you think that the requirement that ADVOCATES be appointed to look out for the interests of each individual kid were a mere technicality? There been more than just a single article exposing this problem. The problem, of course, is and was the state. Hey, as I already mentioned the state got the kids and who really cares what they do with them. Hey, need a Guinea Pigs for research? Yeh. we got lots. Mostly poor and minority. Whose 'best interests' are being served? bobb |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
"bobb" bob@somewhere wrote in message ... "Greegor" wrote in message oups.com... Trying to put a happy face on this one is like painting a smiley face on the nosecone of an atomic bomb. It's like the "Arbeit Macht Frei" sign welded into the gateways of several Nazi death camps. (Work brings freedom or work makes freedom) The courts have already gotten involved, and a FOSTER Mom who refused to knuckle under to the pressure and threats from the agencies got the ball rolling. The rotten agencies thought they could steamroller this one and it WILL backfire severely. The failures that basically enabled the Foster kids to be used almost sadistically as Guinea Pigs for AIDS drugs were and are systemic evils. Did you think that the requirement that ADVOCATES be appointed to look out for the interests of each individual kid were a mere technicality? There been more than just a single article exposing this problem. The problem, of course, is and was the state. Hey, as I already mentioned the state got the kids and who really cares what they do with them. Hey, need a Guinea Pigs for research? Yeh. we got lots. Mostly poor and minority. Whose 'best interests' are being served? bobb Apparently, yours. Your reading comprehension and communications abilities are surpassed only by your lack of intelligence. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
bobb wrote: "Greegor" wrote in message oups.com... Trying to put a happy face on this one is like painting a smiley face on the nosecone of an atomic bomb. It's like the "Arbeit Macht Frei" sign welded into the gateways of several Nazi death camps. (Work brings freedom or work makes freedom) The courts have already gotten involved, and a FOSTER Mom who refused to knuckle under to the pressure and threats from the agencies got the ball rolling. The rotten agencies thought they could steamroller this one and it WILL backfire severely. The failures that basically enabled the Foster kids to be used almost sadistically as Guinea Pigs for AIDS drugs were and are systemic evils. Did you think that the requirement that ADVOCATES be appointed to look out for the interests of each individual kid were a mere technicality? There been more than just a single article exposing this problem. I pointed out that the early article was a piece of yellow journalism. It did not provide depth but instead focused on the sensational by mainly addressing the story of one foster parent advocate for the child in her care. While it's a great hook, it's not the whole story, as this article shows with more balance. The problem, of course, is and was the state. As the first article tried to paint the picture, in limited sensational terms, yes. But that's now the media does things. Some media. Hey, as I already mentioned the state got the kids and who really cares what they do with them. You apparently didn't read this article. Both the reseachers and the state went to considerable pains to protect the children, and to make available to them the same advanced skill and medicines that other non-foster children were being offerred. Hey, need a Guinea Pigs for research? Yeh. we got lots. Mostly poor and minority. You think the 90% of the children entered into the program by their own legal parents were mostly poor and minority? Whose 'best interests' are being served? Those children who lived rather than died. I know of few medical Tx that do not have some discomfort, up to and including considerable pain, but the patient more often lives. In these cases, as the state being surveyed noted, the death rate of AIDS victims dropped considerably. As I recall from 40 to 19. So we could say that 21 children's "best interests" were very well served, don't you think? You seem up to your usual level of intelligent contribution today, bobber. You did your mandatory fifteen headbutts on the edge of the toilet I presume. bobb Read the article again, bobber, and just for the fun of it, comment on each point made in it. You cherry pick, and ignore what differs with your sick biases, just as you do with queers, blacks, women, mexicans, etc. The only good people in your book, apparently, are those that **** children and get too heavy a sentence. 0:-\ |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
wrote in message oups.com... bobb wrote: "Greegor" wrote in message oups.com... Trying to put a happy face on this one is like painting a smiley face on the nosecone of an atomic bomb. It's like the "Arbeit Macht Frei" sign welded into the gateways of several Nazi death camps. (Work brings freedom or work makes freedom) The courts have already gotten involved, and a FOSTER Mom who refused to knuckle under to the pressure and threats from the agencies got the ball rolling. The rotten agencies thought they could steamroller this one and it WILL backfire severely. The failures that basically enabled the Foster kids to be used almost sadistically as Guinea Pigs for AIDS drugs were and are systemic evils. Did you think that the requirement that ADVOCATES be appointed to look out for the interests of each individual kid were a mere technicality? There been more than just a single article exposing this problem. I pointed out that the early article was a piece of yellow journalism. It did not provide depth but instead focused on the sensational by mainly addressing the story of one foster parent advocate for the child in her care. While it's a great hook, it's not the whole story, as this article shows with more balance. The problem, of course, is and was the state. As the first article tried to paint the picture, in limited sensational terms, yes. But that's now the media does things. Some media. Hey, as I already mentioned the state got the kids and who really cares what they do with them. You apparently didn't read this article. Both the reseachers and the state went to considerable pains to protect the children, and to make available to them the same advanced skill and medicines that other non-foster children were being offerred. Only if you beleive the state and the researchers. I don't. There are a great many adults to do 'testing' on while at the same time the best medical care could, and should, be offered foster children. These kids should not be used as test tubes. The state has no business making these kinds of decisions. bobb Hey, need a Guinea Pigs for research? Yeh. we got lots. Mostly poor and minority. You think the 90% of the children entered into the program by their own legal parents were mostly poor and minority? Whose 'best interests' are being served? Those children who lived rather than died. I know of few medical Tx that do not have some discomfort, up to and including considerable pain, but the patient more often lives. In these cases, as the state being surveyed noted, the death rate of AIDS victims dropped considerably. As I recall from 40 to 19. So we could say that 21 children's "best interests" were very well served, don't you think? You seem up to your usual level of intelligent contribution today, bobber. You did your mandatory fifteen headbutts on the edge of the toilet I presume. bobb Read the article again, bobber, and just for the fun of it, comment on each point made in it. You cherry pick, and ignore what differs with your sick biases, just as you do with queers, blacks, women, mexicans, etc. The only good people in your book, apparently, are those that **** children and get too heavy a sentence. 0:-\ |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|