Cancer experiments on death row inmates

I seriously cannot understand you guys. They may still be "people", but freaking BARELY. Whatever happens to them as a result of testing is too good for them.

 

I agree with Bushido.
If someone brutally tortures and murders a child, everyone would go crazy, "Lock him up for life! Death Penalty!" etc.
But they're still people and have rights.

 

No can even become less of a person. No matter what a person does, they're still a member of the human race and deserved to be treated as such. Now, I'm not defending what they did, but they don't deserve that. Doctors are meant to help people, not hurt. Why do you think they work on animals until the treatments are ready for humans? It's extremely risky to do testing on humans. And the patient isn't human. They don't have to stare into the eyes of a rat and have an emotional connection. This is a human being. They had a mother and father. Likes and dislikes. And memories of growing up. How do you think a doctor could feel, watching another human being slowly die at their hands? Without seeing a little bit of themselves.

But it isn't right. We as a whole would be the ones who would become the killers. Forcing these people to testing is immoral. And in the end who becomes the monsters. The people who did wrong and are eventually killed? Or the ones cheering on the action?

 

How is that even a question? Of course it's the people who did wrong.
We're never going to agree on this because we have different opinions on morals. i believe that once you've killed another person and taken away their right to live, you've lost all of your rights as a human. If the testing puts a murderer through more suffering than they would have had rotting in a cell, that's a good thing for me. And even better if it can bring cures to people who aren't murderers.

 

Right, The society that turns the other cheek at cruel treatment of others for the benefit of itself isn't being hypocritical and wouldn't the biggest murderer of all.

But who would could bear the weight be the killer of these people? Now it's fine to say that you're all for something when he don't have to be the one do it. You won't be the one to pull the "trigger" and basically end this person's life. It's easy to perform experiments on an animal. Heck, I did it this summer during my Cancer research internship. But it's another thing to do it to a human being. A rat can't talk back and tell you their story, who they are and the life they lived. Those who would preform said job, would be dehumanized and would have to purge all emotions. Yet, after basically causing death in people from 9-5, day after day. I wouldn't be surprised if those who did the research became insane or killers themselves.

 

That's your opinion. Personally, I would be fine with it.

 

True it is. But too much of anything changes a person. They are corrupted or consumed by it. If all a person experiences is death, they slowly would become it themselves.

If you say so....

 

Apologies for coming in at a seemingly random time here, but I witnessed this statement and had to throw in a piece of my mind.

So, are you saying that they still have human rights?
For example, if a man brutally murders his family, not showing a mere flicker of remorse, you're implying he still should hold his human rights?
Do tell me, please, a few good reasons why someone who has commited such a crime that he has been sentenced to death row, deserves human rights.

 

That was the sarcasm of the statement.
When that man does all that, everyone wants to lock him up and give him the needle with prejudice.
But when that same man can be experimented on to help everyone else, it's inhumane and violating his rights.

 

Don't mind me, I just sit here failing at sarcasm detection. :D

Sorry, jeffycakes. I'll give you your head back later.

 

I'm sorry, but I'm against it. Even though you get to eat fries until you die(woot woot :D), it is cruel and unusual punisment to see if you get cancer from eating fries(killing people is cruel and unusual, too...)

The fire that burns in its bellows can only fall to ash.​

 

Think of it this way.
Look at this story that happened just yesterday.
This man kidnapped this 76 year old woman after he sold her a vacuum and brutally beat her. she suffered heart attacks during the beating and now has chronic leg pain and must take heart medication to keep from dying.
before the incident, she was a swing dancer.

http://www.10news.com/news/22399412/detail.html#

Look at her face. Look at what that sick fuсk did to her.

well, that guy's serving a life sentence. Actually, he's serving two. whoop de-freaking-doo.

he will never be punished enough for what he did to that poor old lady. Even if he was put to death.

but imagine, what if a sick fuсk like that could actually give his life for a greater good?
Regarding my example, what if he had been given certain amounts of acrymalide.
There are two situations. Either he wont get cancer, which will be good because it will put many people's minds at ease regarding the dangers of acrymalide.
Or he will get cancer, which is good, because, well the fuсker deserves 50 different kinds of cancer, and because we'll now know that acrymalide is dangerous and will have to be regulated more. he could potentially be the guinea pig that saves many lives.

 

Agreed, but there's no need to stoop to his level or lower.

It will never be for the greater good, unless he does it of his free will with no benefit to himself. Then he has truely realized the errors of his ways and is willing to work to make amends. He's a bad guy, don't get me wrong. But there's no reason for us to stoop to his level. No matter the benefit, we shouldn't force this on someone. First it's murderers, then the mental challenged and then those we just don't like. It's like a domino effect, as soon as you knock over the rights of one group of people several more will follow afterward.

We could find the same results from testing on Rats. Because rats are mammals, their systems should react to chemicals or testing in a similar way to those of a human test subject. And since they reproduce quickly we can see the effects on different generations.

I doubt it. Once human beings reach a certain age, they really don't have the potential as a genetically altered lab rat. The point of experiments are to see changes from the process being tested. With a rat it's controlled since it's birth, and the scientist can set the factors for the experiment. In say a 30 year old man, there are far to many factors that may lead the experiment's being off. Lifestyle ,Environment influences,Diet, Hereditary, etc. Did this man develop cancer or other illnesses because of his life in combination with the experiments?

 

Who are you to decide what makes a human being human? Who are you to decide ANYTHING for that matter? Who is anyone to decide? This is where the problem arises. Just because you think that using criminals who are serving their punishment dished out to them by society as guinea pigs for research is a fair thing to do doesn't mean it is right. Even if the majority of people think that it would be a fair thing to do, that doesn't mean they are right. No one person can make that decision.

 

It may not make it right, but it doesn't make it wrong either. Whether it's right or wrong, the point is that it's convenient. This person we're dealing with is going to die due to his sentence anyway, and he's a perfect guinea pig. I see no issue.

 

Again I go back to the slippery slope argument, your same logic could be applied to many parts of society. Although I'm sure people would object to many of them, but if they are wowed with the prospects of a possible cure for cancer or better treatments I'm sure the general public could be tricked into having any group be put up for testing.

 

I suppose i see your point, after all stem cell research possibly finding a cure for cancer was a large proponent of abortion, which I find incredibly immoral. I can see where you're coming from, we just fundamentally disagree in terms of morality.

 

This entire argument reminds me of the Grey's Anatomy episode(s) about a death row inmate who wanted to give his organs to a dieing child, and I guess by the end of the show the lesson was: self euthanasia—good, murder—bad.
I have all current seasons on DVD, think I'll go watch it then post my thoughts later.

 

I remember that episode, and there's that book called Change of Heart where a death row inmate wants to be hung so he can donate his heart to the dying younger sister of the girl he murdered.

I guess I'm still going back to allowing them to choose if they want to go in the name of science and the greater good. Maybe in a way right now it's no different than asking if you want to be an organ donor...we don't exactly force people to do that.

 

Well so I didn't go back and watch the Grey's Anatomy episode, but I remember it was both heartwarming and sad.

I myself am participating in a clinical trial, voluntarily letting myself become an experimental subject for medical research. Before any testing and evaluation was done, I was given a consent form to sign, reminding me of my rights, the risks, what procedures would be done, and that I could pull out of the trial at any time. Yesterday was my first appointment.

I was asked to take a breathing test (the clinical trial is for asthma) to take deep breaths and blow hard into a tube attached to a machine. Afterward is when the trial coordinator pricked my skin several times to test for common allergens, hit hurt. She asked if I was okay, but I told her that it was fine. Next was the electrocardiogram test, she told me to relax on a reclining chair and to take off my shirt, to enable her to stick a dozen nodes to my chest, legs, and arms. Then I was asked to pee in a cup, I didn't need to go at the time so I asked for a glass of water, which she gave to me politely. After that was done, she needed a blood sample—more piercing of the skin! After we were done, but before I left, I was given a device, an electronic peck plow meter, for monitoring my asthma at home. She showed me how to use it, and I'm required to take and let it record my peck flow measurements every morning and night, kind of like a twice daily diary. So that's what happened to me yesterday at the doctor's. A lot of effort goes into testing a new drug, at least I'm being reimbursed for my time.

The experiments they're doing to me I don't believe would be easy to do on someone that has no desire to take part. All those exams, tests, and procedures done on an uncooperative person? I think it could even be torture. I doubt many doctors would be inclined to experiment on prisoners.