Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

This plan seems to have excellent incentive alignment and basically mirrors the system in place, but without the need to be approved for clinical trials.

Experimental treatments being available to people with no options (there must be no applicable option with a proven probability of success or this becomes very questionable) could save drug companies millions-billions in the off chance that it proves to be incompatible with human testing or fails to produce the expected effects in humans.

I would take this up a notch or two for patients in a short-range situation that is certainly fatal, opening the door for them to try treatments that have just barely crossed en-vidrio and seem to have acceptable toxicity in mouse models. This would essentially be donating one’s body to science but in a much more useful form, with the side benefit of a slim chance of life extension.

This could benefit humanity by significantly reducing time to market for some drugs and cutting costs on eventual dead-ends.



I don’t think these people would be useful. Pharma needs controlled double blind studies to actually tell if the therapies work.


Of course, for actual efficacy, but you can tell if a treatment has a negative reaction or fails to effect the expected physiology in the expected way with a very small number of samples.

If everyone you give it to dies from reactions, or the expected effects seem to be happening on a physiological level, you don’t know much about efficacy but you do know a lot more about the eventual prospects for an actual clinical trial. It’s basically an extension of en-vidrio testing.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: