• Question: What is your opinion on the experimental Ebola cures. Should they be used on humans yet?

    Asked by Gingerwizard to Ceri, Marikka, Matt, Rob, Sally on 10 Nov 2014. This question was also asked by 653anta39.
    • Photo: Ceri Dare

      Ceri Dare answered on 10 Nov 2014:

      That’s complicated. With new medicines, we don’t know whether they will help people, or accidentally harm them. That’s why animal testing is sadly necessary.
      If I had Ebola, I would take an experimental medicine – not because I expected it to help me, but because then more could be learnt to benefit people with Ebola in the future.

    • Photo: Marikka Beecroft

      Marikka Beecroft answered on 10 Nov 2014:

      This is a complicated issue and personally speaking I think we should take our time with these experimental ebola cures. The procedures put in place to make and test the medicines we use today are there for a reason and like Ceri has said we don’t know if they will help or accidentally harm people.

    • Photo: Robert Hampson

      Robert Hampson answered on 10 Nov 2014:

      The World Health Organisation recently calculated that 70% of people in Africa who catch Ebola die.

      Many of the new “research chemicals” as they are known may be toxic or have negative effects. They are not fully tested or considered ready for sale on the open market as drugs.

      People volunteer to take these chemicals and they are given them under close medical supervision and are then closely monitored to try to figure out the effects of the chemicals.

      If I had Ebola, would I volunteer? Most definitely yes! Would I force anyone else to volunteer, no. Should there be the opportunity to volunteer, yes.

      That’s my opinion anyway.

      Would you volunteer?

    • Photo: Sally Cutler

      Sally Cutler answered on 10 Nov 2014:

      Hi,
      there are some experimental vaccines and you can try to treat some of the clinical consequences, but not sure I would truely call these cures. With such high mortality rates, I imagine those infected will try anything even if it is too late for them, it might benefit other suffers. Trouble is that early signs of infection are very non-specific and by the time you have late features your life is already in the balance and things may not be reversible at this stage. For Ebola I would say prevention is better than cure.

    • Photo: Matt Bilton

      Matt Bilton answered on 11 Nov 2014:

      The World Health Organisation recently decided that it was ethical to offer experimental cures to those who were sick with Ebola:

      ‘In the particular circumstances of this outbreak, and provided certain conditions are met, the panel reached consensus that it is ethical to offer unproven interventions with as yet unknown efficacy and adverse effects, as potential treatment or prevention.’

      The main argument for using a treatment for Ebola infection with unknown guarantee of success and potentially unknown side-effects, is the large risk of death associated with not taking the experimental treatment.

      I think that so long as the medics in the field adhere to the ethical guidelines of the World Health Organisation – making sure that the patient is as informed as they can possibly be to the risks of both taking, and not taking the treatment, and making sure that all the outcomes are reported in the scientific literature – then I think that use of highly experimental treatments is acceptable in this case.

Comments