Unfortunately, it's also been incredibly effective propaganda. Terminally ill patients have been weaponized against critics by #RightToTry advocates in the the same way that cancer quack Stanislaw #Burzynski weaponized terminally ill cancer patients. 1/https://twitter.com/CoyneoftheRealm/status/973529598377058304 …
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @gorskon
You've made good points and, admittedly, I have done very little reading into
#RightToTry. Pts with terminal illnesses (no effective approved drugs) should have access to potentially lifesaving drugs, no? I assume that thorough informed consent is required (as it should be).1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ThePharmaPhD
It is, but it requires greatly diminishing a patient's right to legal recourse, which to me is coercive.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @gorskon
There's no way around that though. Drug makers shouldn't be responsible for AEs related to the optional use of an unfinished drug candidate. Terminally ill pts actively seek out drug trials that may offer hope--unfortunately, many can't get in. RTT would give them options.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Also, I forgot to mention that you misunderstand. We're not talking liability due to AEs. We're immunizing against liability due to malpractice or other activities related to the administration of experimental therapeutics that are not inherent in their experimental nature.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.