Over the last several decades, the Food and Drug Administration has allowed pharma companies to sell hundreds of drugs to patients without adequate evidence that they work and, in many cases, with clear signs that they pose a risk of serious harm.

    • bss03@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      22 hours ago

      You can do single-blind. You do prep, anesthetize, then open the card that decides if the surgery continues, or if the patient is simply awakened at the expected time.

      You can also do it for surgeries that use locals, but then the surgical staff has to do a lot of miming/acting instead of actual cutting.

      Medlife Crisis did a couple of Placebo effect videos, and mentioned that he participated in a single-blind stent study.

      I don’t know how you’d do double-blind.

      • webghost0101@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        23 hours ago

        That a great take.

        Double blind could be a different team comes In and either does the surgery or fakes it. And this team also does or Fakes the after care.

        This team is never to communicate with patient or normal staff.

    • ToastedRavioli@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      Either way, that is a pretty massive digression from the article, which is about medications. Apparently more people are dying on average from recently approved drugs than are dying from all illegal drug use combined. And the examples are not for extremely rare medications

      “We need an agency that’s independent from the industry it regulates and that uses high-quality science to assess the safety and efficacy of new drugs,”… “Without that, we might as well go back to the days of snake oil and patent medicines.”

      We basically are already there now, it seems

      • Neuromancer49@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        2 days ago

        Fair point, but a lot of the article talks about how many studies aren’t meeting all four pillars of clinical trial design - that’s where my issue comes in, I think reporting that X% of trials do not meet all pillars is a bad metric.

        And, not all medications these days are pills or IV infusions - some medications and treatments, which are governed by the FDA, are more invasive and more complicated.