IT SEEMS like a no-brainer. If people are deathly ill, give them any drug that shows the slightest sign of working – never mind if it has passed the usual tests.
Such "compassionate use" has been the norm for years when it comes to experimental cancer drugs. But there are fewer precedents for the World Health Organization's decision to use unproven drugs to tackle the current Ebola outbreak, following bioethicists' advice that this is justified if as much clinical data is gathered as possible.
It was a tricky decision. Some cried foul when Western doctors were first to get the experimental drug ZMapp; now two Liberian medics will get it as well (see "Revealed: How Ebola paralyses the immune system"). Conversely, the charge that Africans are being used as guinea pigs has already been rehearsed.
It must be said that Ebola, while horrific, was not a major health concern until recently. But we have long understood that for-profit businesses cannot fully test treatments for a sporadic disease. We should have prepared for this eventuality long ago, rather than scrambling to do so now. More novel, and more dangerous, diseases are out there. We must be better prepared next time.
This article appeared in print under the headline "Rushing out the Ebola experiment"
- New Scientist
- Not just a website!
- Subscribe to New Scientist and get:
- New Scientist magazine delivered every week
- Unlimited online access to articles from over 500 back issues
- Subscribe Now and Save
If you would like to reuse any content from New Scientist, either in print or online, please contact the syndication department first for permission. New Scientist does not own rights to photos, but there are a variety of licensing options available for use of articles and graphics we own the copyright to.
