The medical treatments with the best empirical support are based on randomized clinical trials, but even those have reliability problems, in addition to publication selection biases and leaky placebo effects.
It is widely reported that patients who get kicked out of studies for side effects don't get paid. I'll take Alex O'Meara's claims into consideration, but the way you phrased it makes it seem like he has naive faith in contracts.
If they do get paid when they drop out with side-effects, that's an incentive to fake side-effects to leave the study. Faking side effects just to leave the study seems unlikely to me.
"The system doesn't work that way" doesn't clarify much. Those who run the study can't directly observe all side effects, so they must rely on patient reports for many of them, right?
I was listening to the Diane Rehm show yesterday and they were discussing this very issue. The guest clarified two things:
1) It was suggested that people don't report side effects for fear of not being paid. The guest clarified that that doesn't happen because the system doesn't work that way. He said any under reporting is either an attempt to stay on the meds by people who feel they really need them, or a social thing in which the subject doesn't want "disappoint" the researcher.
2) There is no need to fake side effects to get out of a trial. A subject is free to discontinue participation at any time for any reason or no reason at all.
It is widely reported that patients who get kicked out of studies for side effects don't get paid. I'll take Alex O'Meara's claims into consideration, but the way you phrased it makes it seem like he has naive faith in contracts.
If they do get paid when they drop out with side-effects, that's an incentive to fake side-effects to leave the study. Faking side effects just to leave the study seems unlikely to me.
"The system doesn't work that way" doesn't clarify much. Those who run the study can't directly observe all side effects, so they must rely on patient reports for many of them, right?
I was listening to the Diane Rehm show yesterday and they were discussing this very issue. The guest clarified two things:
1) It was suggested that people don't report side effects for fear of not being paid. The guest clarified that that doesn't happen because the system doesn't work that way. He said any under reporting is either an attempt to stay on the meds by people who feel they really need them, or a social thing in which the subject doesn't want "disappoint" the researcher.
2) There is no need to fake side effects to get out of a trial. A subject is free to discontinue participation at any time for any reason or no reason at all.
It is widely reported that patients who get kicked out of studies for side effects don't get paid. I'll take Alex O'Meara's claims into consideration, but the way you phrased it makes it seem like he has naive faith in contracts.
If they do get paid when they drop out with side-effects, that's an incentive to fake side-effects to leave the study. Faking side effects just to leave the study seems unlikely to me.
Ouch.
This scenario had never crossed my mind, and I was *already* getting pretty sceptical regarding medicine.
"The system doesn't work that way" doesn't clarify much. Those who run the study can't directly observe all side effects, so they must rely on patient reports for many of them, right?
I was listening to the Diane Rehm show yesterday and they were discussing this very issue. The guest clarified two things:
1) It was suggested that people don't report side effects for fear of not being paid. The guest clarified that that doesn't happen because the system doesn't work that way. He said any under reporting is either an attempt to stay on the meds by people who feel they really need them, or a social thing in which the subject doesn't want "disappoint" the researcher.
2) There is no need to fake side effects to get out of a trial. A subject is free to discontinue participation at any time for any reason or no reason at all.
It is widely reported that patients who get kicked out of studies for side effects don't get paid. I'll take Alex O'Meara's claims into consideration, but the way you phrased it makes it seem like he has naive faith in contracts.
If they do get paid when they drop out with side-effects, that's an incentive to fake side-effects to leave the study. Faking side effects just to leave the study seems unlikely to me.
Ouch.
This scenario had never crossed my mind, and I was *already* getting pretty sceptical regarding medicine.
"The system doesn't work that way" doesn't clarify much. Those who run the study can't directly observe all side effects, so they must rely on patient reports for many of them, right?
I was listening to the Diane Rehm show yesterday and they were discussing this very issue. The guest clarified two things:
1) It was suggested that people don't report side effects for fear of not being paid. The guest clarified that that doesn't happen because the system doesn't work that way. He said any under reporting is either an attempt to stay on the meds by people who feel they really need them, or a social thing in which the subject doesn't want "disappoint" the researcher.
2) There is no need to fake side effects to get out of a trial. A subject is free to discontinue participation at any time for any reason or no reason at all.