September 2, 2002. South Carolina Judges Voted to Ban Secret Court Settlements. By Adam Liptak – New York Times. The NY Times reports that South Carolina’s 10 active federal trial judges unanimously voted to ban secret court settlements “that have made the courts complicit in hiding the truth about hazardous…
Comments Re: DHHS Notice of Proposed Recommendation Regarding Support of Research Protocol: "Precursors to Diabetes in Japanese American Youth" Grant Number I R01 DK59234-01
The proposed experiment would involve 450 children healthy children, aged 8-10 years old, 300 of Japanese ancestry and 150 Caucasians. The experiment is not approvable under federal regulations, 45 CFR 46 Subpart D because it involves greater than minimal risk and no potential direct benefit to the children.
Insead of producing drugs for recognized diseases, drug manufacturers are creating diseasesin order to sell their drugs.
Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome – ARDSNet experiment criticized – OHRP Fri, 28 Feb 2003 An Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) study conducted between 1996 and 1999, on critically ill patients at 20 medical facilities (14 major research centers belonging to the ARDS Network), was published in The New England Journal…
High Mortality Rates in Clinical Trials Mon, 4 Nov 2002 Serious concerns are being raised about the high death rate in clinical trials. According to several articles in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, the lives of critically ill patients have been put at increased risk due…
THE ALLIANCE FOR HUMAN RESEARCH PROTECTION (AHRP) New York, NY 10023 212-595-8974 July 29, 2002 Greg Koski, MD, Ph.D. Office of the Secretary Office of Public Health and Science Office of Human Research Protection The Tower Building 1101 Wooten Parkway, Suite 200 Rockville, MD 20852 RELATED PAGES OHRP Investigation of…
Dying for a Cure: Pediatric Cancer Trial Undisclosed facts – NBC, Chicago Thu, 14 Nov 2002 How can parents protect their children from harmful medical experiments if the facts are withheld from them? So far, Congress has enacted no law to protect children from experiments that disregard their life-safety in…
Dr. Meryl Nass, a member of the board of directors of The Alliance for Human Research Protection (AHRP), is an acknowledged expert on anthrax, biological terrorism, and is a US authority on adverse reactions due to the anthrax vaccine. Dr. Nass has been a leading opponent of U.S. military policies that continue to treat military servicemembers as a ready pool of experimental subjects, in the absence of meaningful informed consent.
Dr. Nass will be appeaing on several national and international TV and radio programs:
July 15, 2002 Short Drug Tests, Fatal Flaws. Thomas J. Moore. Op Ed. Boston Globe. FYI “We need new laws, a national scientific program, and money to assure that every important drug intended for long-term use receives the same long-term testing as was provided for hormone replacement therapy.” An Op-ed…
Los Angeles Times Monday July 08, 2002 Commentary Mental Health Insurance Parity Is an Empty Notion Page B-11 By DAVID COHEN and KEITH HOELLER, David Cohen is a professor of social welfare at Florida International University, Miami. Keith Hoeller is editor of the Review of Existential Psychology & Psychiatry in…
Dr. Meryl Nass
An estimated 500,000 first responders, lab and hospital workers will receive smallpox vaccine, the DHHS announced yesterday.
This is an interesting announcement, because to my knowledge there exist no FDA-licensed smallpox vaccines.
There are three vaccine candidates whose safety and efficacy are uncertain at this time.
The first vaccine made available was Wyeth’s Dryvax, which was pulled out of storage after approximately thirty years.
REASONS FOR OPPOSITION:
Researchers would not be required to first try approved treatments, if any exist, before entering the patient into a medical experiment that may be "risky."
Researchers would not be required to consult with an independent medical expert, a non-researcher who would consider the patient’s best medical interests as paramount.
Researchers would not be required to disclose their own professional and financial interests deriving from the experiment.
Researchers would not be required to fully disclose to the patient’s family what happened to other patients who had already participated in the experiment.
