Granted, limiting the study to such a select group of patients isn't ethical - but in the hypothetical I'd like my partner to at least consider submitting such a study. Mind you: considering it isn't the same as actually doing it but the denials came a bit too fast for my taste.

Then we had Reynolds and the lung transplant... and he's just reimplanting it in the original donor (whom it was stolen from)? It's not clear how long the lung had been in the recipient etc. So that's a bit strange... even that they found out the donor was a bit very strange, considering the illegal methods of acquiring the organ.

The less said about Iggy the better... I mean trying to force someone to have treatment? Not even explaining the consequences of a court decision? That's pretty unethical. I mean where would we go from there? Forcing everyone to have therapy against their will? Granted, the patient might die, she might also reconsider down the line, who knows. But the way Iggy acted here would be enough to reconsider his license.

loading replies
Loading...