Lord Winston, the Professor of Science and Society and Emeritus Professor of Fertility Studies at Imperial College London, spoke about his father who died following experimental brain surgery. Lord Winston was nine when his father died and said he had witnessed the horror that followed untested and unsuccessful medicine.
He said he was “astonished at the government’s support” of the bill, saying it would create dangers for patients. He warned that there was 'very, very, considerable confusion' among doctors over the bill.
Dominic Nutt, a spokesman for Lord Saatchi’s campaign, told the Today programme on Radio 4, that the changes would allow patients to take risks if they felt the danger was justified.
“If you’re on a plane, it’s about to crash into a mountainside, you’re going to die, and in the corner there’s a parachute that says ‘untested – caution’, would you grab that parachute, or say ‘that’s dangerous, I’ll just crash and die’?” said Mr Nutt, who has a rare sort of cancer called neuroendocrine tumour.
Dr Wollaston, however, said that the proposed trials would undermine clinical trials, saying it was “very very bad news”.
“We know what treatments work and what treatments don’t as a result of clinical trials, not as a result of anecdotal treatments which, within this legislation, can’t even be linked – it specifically precludes them from being involved in research,” she warned.
Cancer charities and the Medical Research Council united to say that they had 'significant concerns' about whether the bill would achieve its aim of encouraging innovation.
'It is essential that provision is made for collecting and sharing data in order to ensure that information of both beneficial and harmful effects of treatment is captured for the benefit of subsequent patients,' the group said.
The Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (APIL) warned that the bill would create a 'patient safety nightmare' if it was allowed to proceed.
“In his obvious desire to help terminally ill people Lord Saatchi has become blind to the real consequences of his Bill for patients and doctors, and continues to push it regardless of reasoned opposition from experts,” said John Spencer, president of the APIL.' http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/11289852/Lord-Saatchi-bill-on-medical-innovation-faces-criticism-from-doctors.html
What do you think? Would you accept untested treatment if everything else had failed? Would you feel comfortable with doctors treating your loved one with something untested? Or should all treatments be fully tested prior to going to market to ensure patients can be fully informed of benefits and possible risks?
Image source