I’m wondering because pharmaceutical ads can list some pretty major side effects, let’s say like kidney failure or “even death”. Does that mean that in the human trials a significant enough percentage of the test population died? Seems kinda messed up to pay people to test medications if they can end up getting seriously hurt..
In: 2
I can tell you about a trial that I was involved in where my company was testing a drug in humans.
The first thing we did was test the heck out of the drug in mice and monkeys. Once we we fairly certain it could treat the deadly disease and was relatively safe, we got government permission to set up a trial.
We found people who had the deadly illness, and who had failed to respond to any other drugs, and who were a few weeks from death.
The doctors asked those people: “would you be willing to try a new drug? It might kill you faster. It might buy you some time. We don’t know. But whatever information we gain might someday help save the lives of people with your illness.”
Some people signed up. They weren’t paid. They did it out of altruism or out of hope that we would give them a miracle cure.
We tried out the drug, first at super low doses just to make sure it wasn’t too toxic. Then we tried to figure out what dose might be the most effective dose.
We tested their blood and urine. We asked them lots of questions about every possible side effect that they might feel. We measured carefully. If someone seemed to be having a side effect that could kill them faster, we would have to take them off the drug as soon as we realized.
Eventually, we got the dose right, and then somebody who was at death’s door got healthier and lived for another year more than they should have.
We made the drug better and better. As we got more confident that our drug was at least as good as the other drugs, we asked more people to do the trials. At this point we were constantly doing math to try to keep the risk to our drug trial participants as low as possible. But they knew there was a risk that participating in our drug test could cause them to live less long. We obviously hoped that we would help them to live longer, but we couldn’t be sure. We would watch the numbers every week and test everyone’s blood and urine frequently to try to make sure that if someone reacted badly, we could take them off the drug as fast as possible.
We tried different versions of the drug to compare to each other. If one version was significantly better than the other, we might be obligated to stop the trial and give everyone the better version as soon as the math had proved it was better.
Eventually the drug was able to cure the disease 90% of the time and it was approved.
Latest Answers