Prof. Michael Baum Interview (4/6) – Richard Dawkins
London. The discussion covers alternative and complimentary medicines, and how they interact with scientific medicine. This video is provided free online by The Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science and richarddawkins.net . If you enjoy the video and would like to support our work, please purchase the program on DVD (which includes 8 other uncut interviews) at richarddawkins.net … “Richard Dawkins” “Michael Baum” “Complimentary Medicine” “Alternative Medicine” Homeopathy Science …
kudos to Professor Baum. Such a wise person.
Regarding the people who died because the drug wasn’t yet approved, it seems to me that the decision of whether to take an unapproved drug should be up to the patient. If I was dying of a terminal disease, and there were a number of yet unapproved medicines, some of which might kill me, and some of which might cure me, I’d rather take my chances that one of the unapproved drugs would kill me instead of simply waiting for the disease to kill me anyway. I’d say: use me as a test subject, PLEASE!
This is more and more often the case theinquisitor.
I read some of the literature and letters on this subject occasionally, the consensus is very much weighted towards doing precisely as you suggest, indeed most people with terminal conditions will report that they are the subject of latest studies and research, which is often also halted so that all may benefit from any effects as they are observed.
Most doctors really want to help their patients to recovery. New treatments are bedtime reading
“makes you weep” – so true
Then you are welcome, if you qualify, to join a clinical trial, if the research is to the point where it would be ethical to start human testing.
Otherwise, It would be unethical to allow the patient to take an untested drug that could very easily hurt the patient. Remember medical rule #1: do no harm.
Regarding “do no harm”, I’m not sure it can be an absolute rule. Given that most medical procedures involve at least some risk, adhering to the letter of that rule would mean no surgery or drugs at all.
I think there always has to be a weighing of risk vs reward in determining whether a given treatment is appropriate. In cases that are certainly terminal, the risk of no treatment is as high as the risk of any treatment. As long as the patient is informed, I think it should be their decision.
But without the trial, you dont know the risk v reward. Herceptin turned out to be a good drug in the end. Don’t forget for every one drug to the market something like 10000 ‘drugs’ dont make it because their toxicity is worse than their risk turned out to be worse than the reward. You’d be glad you didn’t take one of those which killed you early or made you suffer. And who’s paying for your folly?
hmm… wish I’d proof read that before posting!
…10000 ‘drugs’ dont make it because their risk turned out to be worse than the reward.
“But without the trial, you dont know the risk v reward”
Good point, but in the case of an incurable imminently terminal illness, isn’t the risk of no treatment the same as the risk of any treatment? If the treatment kills me, thats the same result as if I hadn’t had it.
“And who’s paying for your folly?”
In such a case I think that the patient would have to be the one to pay. It may indeed be folly, but if the patient is paying, and is informed, shouldn’t the patient be the one to decide?
“If the treatment kills me, thats the same result as if I hadn’t had it.”
Ooo… hang on. Do you want to die in 5 years time or next month? Either way you die, but the options aren’t equal!
“…and is informed”
I agree. But it is difficult (impossible) to inform a patient of all the risks and benefits in a way they understand. (Unless they are already a professor of that disease!). And with new drugs nobody actually knows yet what the risks and benefits are.
Why is youtube so fucking slow!! too many brats on here listening to music vidoes and watching crap, the video keeps stopping whilst it loads! bloody annoying lol this intereview is the holy grail no pun intended lol
I can’t see any pun
pun – play on words -the Holy Grail was the dish, plate, or cup used by Jesus at the Last Supper, said to possess miraculous powers-crap -irony -richard dawkins-science based intellectual who thinks religious nuts are delluded freaks along with this new age shit
Can u see the pun now you buffoon!
I know what a pun is but what you said didn’t involve a pun. At best it’s a poor attempt at irony. A pun is an interplay involving a single word or several or proposition linking two unrelated concepts. The two concepts that you linked together through “holy grail” proposition aren’t unrelated because one is a metaphor of another. It’s like me saying Dawkins is a God and calling that a pun.
Ok Oracle thanks for the enlightenment! play on words – holy grail was playing with it in relation to Dawkins, and yes it’s a little ironic – a poor attempt well thats your opinion of which you are entitled. In relation to the conversation with these two intellects and the debate about science based medicine versus this HOListic crap the holy grail fits in quite nicely and of course has a double meaning in my context. And what is your profile name all about? sounds like a racehorse
Holistic crap would be a pun, although the original concept it refers to isn’t relevant at all so it wouldn’t be funny. As for my name it refers to that funny old feeling you get usually at dusk and you don’t whether you wanna hold on to it or whether you want it to go away .
Oops just realized I used a different name to respond. The explanation refers to my other name. This name refers to the strange glee you sometimes can’t help feeling when you see other people suffer financially.
Hmmm? sounds a little narcissistic to me,but thanks for the explanation.
Danadaneils stop using dial up or get a new fing job to pay for higher speed. I have DSL with one gig of ram and YouTube has never failed me. I must say 1 gig of ram is on the low side!
Excellent interview! Wolf Kyoto/Japan
“The God Debate” is on my channel.