It's a shame that autocomplete can still elicit laughs.
I like to think about it in another way: If poor people were given preference in terms of going on drug trials, would the same groups be up in arms about the poor being used as guinea pigs for the rich?
> If poor people were given preference in terms of going
> on drug trials, would the same groups be up in arms
> about the poor being used as guinea pigs for the rich?
> What if the first doses of the drug — which had never
> been used in people and had not even finished the
> typical animal safety testing — had been given to
> African patients instead?
> “It would have been the front-page screaming headline:
> ‘Africans used as guinea pigs for American drug
> company’s medicine,’ ” said Dr. Salim S. Abdool Karim,
> director of Caprisa, an AIDS research center in South
> Africa.
https://www.google.com/search?tbm=nws&q=ebola+"Guinea+pigs"&...
That's already how most drugs are currently tested. We used to test new drugs on prisoners and conscientious objectors, now we just test them on the poor and indigent.
Why, why let ethics mess up a perfectly profitable business idea?
>Of course, it would be ideal if resources were simply abundant and all these trials could be funded without giving special treatment to wealthy donors.
I don't think it's about resources, it's about their distribution. Such trials CAN be funded "without giving special treatment to wealthy donors" -- we're spending trillions more giving special treatmeants to wealthy people,(such as bailouts).
I'm not going to argue the public policy motivation behind bailouts as we could go on quite a tangent there, but the fact is that many clinical trials go unfunded. Obviously money exists somewhere, and the government could unilaterally decide that it's more valuable to fund clinical research than to bail out failing companies (or buy F35s, or build schools, or whatever). Thus far they haven't done so. This plan, on the other hand, could actually start saving people's lives immediately.
Other group - deontologist believe in some rule or sets of rule and they might not be concerned with consenquences that much.
Famous trolley problem describe this idea nicely.
Obviously this is problem on its own.
Of course, it would be ideal if resources were simply abundant and all these trials could be funded without giving special treatment to wealthy donors. But given that we don't live in that world, I would certainly rather see one wealthy donor and nine other individuals (for example) get access to a potentially life-saving therapy than to have them all die in the name of equality.