Read The Reading Attached For Harriet's Case First And Then ✓ Solved

Read The Reading Attached For Harriets Case First And Then Answer T

Read the reading attached for Harriet’s case first, and then answer the following three questions (each answer should be at least one paragraph long). Question 1: This case is slightly different from all the other cases we looked at. This case looks at the questionable topic of CLINICAL TRIALS. On a smaller view it is about testing certain drugs and/or treatments. We all know that quite a bit of testing is done on animals. Whether we agree with this or not, one has to ask this question: CAN THE RESULTS OF AN ANIMAL TEST APPLY TO HUMANS? Question 2: The one condition that we see in the press and other readings is CANCER. It is not the most common condition, but it can be fatal. The treatments are difficult and don't always work. So, the drug companies are searching for either a cure or a treatment that is not so toxic. WHY ARE THEY DOING THIS? Question 3: ANSWER THIS QUESTION: Finding a cure or treatment for CA is what everyone wants, or do they? REASONS PLEASE.

Patient Offered New Cancer Treatment Harriet Abeline had faced bad news before. She was diagnosed with breast cancer five years ago and underwent a lumpectomy and radiation treatment. Two years later, a routine mammogram revealed another lump.

She faced this challenge with similar treatment. Harriet understood medicine; for years she had worked as a recruiter for a major drug company interviewing and hiring scientists and physicians. The company was a reputable and honest business and developed drugs that were used all over the world. So with each recurrence of cancer, she researched her situation and the available drugs being used for treatment. With each Google search, she read about the experimental treatments that were available for end-stage breast cancer, keeping them in the back of her mind.

Now, as her doctor told her that the cancer had spread to her bones, Harriet was frightened. Dr. Hill understood her fear. She had been working with cancer patients for years and lately, had been using some of the newer treatments available for late-stage cancers. She told Harriet that she could enter an FDA phase 2 clinical trial for a new genetically engineered drug that would target her specific type of tumor.

Harriet knew that phase 2 trials are designed to test for side effects and risks of the treatment. She also knew there was no guarantee that the treatment would cure her cancer.

Sample Paper For Above instruction

Question 1: Can the results of animal testing be applicable to humans?

Animal testing has long been a controversial aspect of biomedical research, especially in the context of developing new treatments and drugs. The primary intention behind using animals is to obtain preliminary data on the safety and efficacy of potential therapies before they are administered to humans. Animals share many physiological and genetic similarities with humans, which can make them valuable models for understanding disease mechanisms and predicting human responses. However, the applicability of animal test results to humans is fraught with limitations due to biological differences. For instance, many drugs that show promise in animal studies fail in human trials because of metabolic differences, immune responses, or variations in disease progression. Consequently, while animal testing can serve as an essential step in the research pipeline, it should not be the sole basis for human clinical application. Ethical considerations also play a role, promoting the refinement, reduction, and replacement (the 3Rs) of animal use in research. Ultimately, animal tests can inform human studies, but their results must be interpreted cautiously and complemented by clinical trials involving human subjects to accurately determine safety and effectiveness.

Question 2: Why are drug companies searching for less toxic cancer treatments?

Cancer treatments have traditionally involved aggressive methods such as chemotherapy, radiation, and invasive surgeries, which often cause severe side effects and significantly diminish quality of life. The toxicity associated with these treatments can lead to complications, hospitalization, and even mortality in some cases. As a response, drug companies are intensely searching for less toxic, targeted therapies that specifically attack cancer cells while sparing healthy tissue. This quest is driven by the desire to improve patient outcomes, reduce adverse effects, and increase survival rates. Recent advances in molecular biology and genetics have facilitated the development of targeted therapies, such as genetically engineered drugs designed to interfere with specific pathways involved in tumor growth. These approaches aim to provide more effective and personalized treatments, minimizing the debilitating side effects common in traditional therapies. The overarching goal is to find treatments that are not only more effective but also safer and better tolerated, ultimately leading to a better quality of life for patients battling cancer.

Question 3: Do people genuinely want a cure for cancer, or are there other reasons?

On the surface, it appears that everyone desires a cure for cancer. However, the motivations behind pursuing a cure are complex and multifaceted. Some stakeholders may be driven by compassion, the desire to alleviate suffering, and the wish to save lives, which align with altruistic motives. Others, including pharmaceutical companies, might be motivated by financial gains, as cancer therapies represent a lucrative market. Additionally, there can be geopolitical and institutional incentives to continue research, regardless of whether a cure is imminent, to maintain technological dominance or funding streams. Moreover, ethical dilemmas arise when considering the risks and benefits of experimental treatments; some patients, like Harriet, may opt for experimental trials out of desperation, hope, or a belief in science, even if there is no guarantee of success. Conversely, some entities might prioritize prolonging life or improving quality of life rather than outright curing the disease. Therefore, while a cure for cancer is a universal ideal, various economic, ethical, and personal factors influence whether all parties genuinely focus solely on eradication or if other motives subtly influence ongoing efforts.

References

• Gulخت, A., & Sadeghi, N. (2018). Ethical considerations in scientific research involving animals. Journal of Medical Ethics, 44(4), 308-312.
• National Cancer Institute. (2021). Targeted Cancer Therapies. Retrieved from https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/treatment/types/targeted-therapies
• Russell, W. M. S., & Burch, R. L. (1959). The Principles of Humane Experimental Technique. London: Methuen.
• FDA. (2020). Clinical Trials for Cancer Drugs. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Retrieved from https://www.fda.gov
• Snyderman, R. (2019). The ethics of animal research: A comprehensive review. Ethics in Medicine, 35(2), 115-124.
• Whelan, R. (2020). Advances in targeted cancer therapy. Oncology Review, 14(3), 250-260.
• World Health Organization. (2022). Cancer Fact Sheets. Retrieved from https://www.who.int
• Vitetta, L., & Valerio, L. (2019). The ethics of clinical trials and human research. Journal of Medical Ethics, 45(7), 441-445.
• Yoshida, K., & Saito, T. (2017). New approaches in cancer treatment: Targeted therapy and immunotherapy. Medical Oncology, 34(8), 121.
• Murphy, D. (2016). Ethical challenges in clinical trial design. Bioethics, 30(2), 95-102.