Isn鈥檛 it unethical to prescribe experimental drugs?

Medicines to treat diseases such as HIV are prescribed before long term effects are realized. Often side affects such as Gillian Barre (muscle weakness-lungs being the primary muscle that leads to death), renal failure, and strokes are suspected, but what percentage will be affected is not known.

1) Doesn鈥檛 his falsely increase the number of death鈥檚 in the USA of those 鈥渨ho dies of HIV/AIDS? (Being that some die of side effects of medications, which means the death was not caused by the disease, but by the treatment.)
2) Since tax money pays for research, shouldn鈥檛 it be better tested before prescribing to those who are ill with any disease and therefore weaker than a person with no diseases?
3) When these medications hurt someone, isn鈥檛 is unethical for the healthcare facility and pharmaceutical company to charge (or be paid) for the treatment that led to the adverse affects?
4) Does anyone else feel that signing a contract that relieves medical and pharmaceutical institutions of all responsibility is in part responsible for increase in extensive health care and social services?
5) Drugs are 鈥渆xperimental鈥?because they have not been yet been proven to be safe. Isn鈥檛 this a red flag that it may not be safe? (Especially when one must sign off responsibility!)

Mike J.: Where are you from. I been a traveling nurse working in level 1 trauma centers all over this country for eight years. I have also worked on the case management end. I have never seen treatment not covered by either private, state or a federal plan. Hospitals want to be paid one way or another and they do. For the druggie coming in biting, kicking and pulling out tubes as fast as we put them in, they get top notch care even though he/she did it to his/her self and in spite of what they do to those saving their life. Also, usually this group can't sustain a job and therefore have no insurance, thus tax funded insurance pays for the bill they run up.

Drugs cannot really be proven safe until taken by people. Animal testing has been shown to be unreliable and despite the masses of laboratory work that can be done to test drugs the simple fact remains that the real tests come when giving those drugs to real people. People can act and react differently to each other so this is always going to be a difficult area. You have some reasonable points there, the main problem is that the pharmaceutical companies are out to make money at all cost...

Like everything in life, it's risk versus reward.

experimental drugs are not given to humans until they pass preliminary testing, then it isnt until after all other treatments have failed in a patient do they have a chance to take part in the study. They are also given intense counseling on the possible side effects and the fact there may be some that why dont know about. We must do this to find new ways to treat diseases and this is the most safe and ethical way to do so. Hope that helps,
Melissa

Not approved by the FDA - unethical. Your insurance won't cover you from damage from an illegal drug.

ABSOLUTELY, IT IS BECAUSE THAT IS A THREAT IN ONCE LIFE...