posted
I wonder how many people are actually going to wear a bracelet on the off-chance they get in a life-threatening accident and are chosen to participate in this study.
Posts: 377 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I also wonder why people are paranoid of this. Um, do you have any reason to? A synthetic blood replacement for use in emergency situations sounds almost too good to be true.
Posts: 1813 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
If you look at the more info link on the news story, it says in previous studies people who were getting the fake stuff had more complications than the control group. But it also says they're old people. But it's probably sixes anyway, if you're going to die of blood loss without it.
Posts: 377 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Go read the link. [addit: to the earlier discussion] Seriously, I know it's three pages, but read it.
The previous study (1996) had poor results. Preliminary results in this study are not great. While they won't use PolyHeme on "visibly pregnant" women, what about first trimester (when it would likely be most problematic)?
What about the fact that people should NOT have to opt out of a study like this -- it SHOULD be opt in?
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Is there an option to only use the synthetic blood if there is no real blood available (and it's *extremely* necessary)? If there is, I want that bracelet.
I mean, it sounds like a good idea that should be explored, but not if there's a perfectly good alternative.
Posts: 4089 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I find it absurd that they're allowed to do this. Who knows what kind of complications can result? I'm not going to go visit my husband's uncle in Salt Lake while this is going on.
For gosh sakes, I'm allergic to rubbing alcohol. I am not willing to expose myself to this stuff.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I was on the Institutional Review Panel that reviewed and approved this study in Salt Lake. I had several objections to the study but ultimately abstained from the vote.
This study will be done on severe trauma patients who have lost significant amounts of blood. Most patients will be from automobile crashes. The current standard of care for this condition is to administer saline solution until the patient is hospitalized which is widely known to be inadequate. If the polyheme is sucessful, it will represent a significant benefit to trauma patients . Current research indicates that the risks of using polyheme are far outweighed by the potential benefits to trauma patients but existing research is wholely inadequate because it compares polyheme to whole blood and not to saline (the standard of care in trauma). Because the target population for this study are severe trauma patients, there is no possible way this study could be done with informed consent. The choice we had was to do the study as proposed without informed consent or not to do it.
As I said before, I had several objections to the study and obstained form the vote. If people are interested I can explain my objections and the reasons why I obstained from the vote rather than voting against the study.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
Probably busy with one of those RL deals.
