[FRIAM] is this true?

[uǝlƃ ☣]

And I suppose it might be a bit unethical to approach such things purely objectively. Both Renee' and my oncologist seemed quite happy I was assigned to the arm of my cancer study that used the new antibody (obinutuzumab).  The control was the old antibody (rituxumab).  I suppose it was justified that nobody was assigned to a placebo group because ... well, I guess it seems a bit unethical to give placebo to stage 4 cancer patients. But I consistently looked around at my fellow patients, sitting in their infusion chairs for hours on end and wondering which ones got the "old" therapy.  Of course, they still benefited to some extent because the PI's budget paid for their rituxumab, lowering their out of pocket by ... like ... a lot.

Scott Alexander expressed this fairly well, though I can't find the particular post now.  It went something like "My purpose is to improve my patients' lives, not discover objective truths."

On 3/8/19 3:25 PM, Frank Wimberly wrote:
> These days it would be difficult to sort this out.  Psychiatrists who do psychotherapy (not all) almost all use meds too.  Psychoanalysts are now rare but they traditionally wouldn't prescribe an aspirin for a patient's headache.

-- 
☣ uǝlƃ