• FluTrackers.com Inc. does not provide medical advice. Information on this web site is collected from various internet resources, and the FluTrackers board of directors makes no warranty to the safety, efficacy, correctness or completeness of the information posted on this site by any author or poster. The information collated here is for instructional and/or discussion purposes only and is NOT intended to diagnose or treat any disease, illness, or other medical condition. Every individual reader or poster should seek advice from their personal physician/healthcare practitioner before considering or using any interventions that are discussed on this website. By continuing to access this website you agree to consult your personal physican before using any interventions posted on this website, and you agree to hold harmless FluTrackers.com Inc., the board of directors, the members, and all authors and posters for any effects from use of any medication, supplement, vitamin or other substance, device, intervention, etc. mentioned in posts on this website, or other internet venues referenced in posts on this website.
  • We are not asking for any donations. Do not donate to any entity who says they are raising funds for us.

U.S.: '160 prisoners were injected with live cancer cells'

Tonka

Well-known member
http://www.aporrea.org/internacionales/n176521.html
Spanish to English translation

U.S.: '160 prisoners were injected with live cancer cells':(
By: Spencer Hunt, Thecolumbusdispatch.com, translated by Ivana Cardinale (*)
Release Date: 09/03/1911

Dr. Chester performs tests with human prisoners
Credit: University of Ohio
March 9, 2011.-Henry Langlois was one of the 38 soldiers who were told in 1955 that they were serving their country when they were volunteers to inhale a biological agent that the government was testing.

A year later, prisoners of the Penitentiary in Ohio were told that they were serving when they volunteered to allow researchers to inject live cancer cells.

In the 60's and 70's, to 15,000 marines were told the same thing when scientists at Ohio State University (OSU for its acronym in English) tested a vaccine for pneumonia in them.

These and other experiments funded by the government in military personnel, prisoners and mental patients are conducting an investigation into the rules that are designed to protect volunteers for specific studies.

The Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethics Affairs met last week to discuss the "protection of human beings" after the government apologized in October for the era of the 40 experiments. In the investigation, Guatemala soldiers, prisoners and mental patients were infected with syphilis to test treatments of penicillin.

A spokeswoman for one of the three committees of the OSU who reviewed the proposals involving human subjects, Karla Zadnik said, "It was something like 'free for all." It seems that it was regulated and controlled. " Each year, OSU researchers conducting studies involving about 5000 people.

"There are people here who worked really hard every day to avoid anything even close to the events of the past happen again," he said.

A review of files revealed Dispatch several studies in the 50 and 60 who used inmates in the Ohio Penitentiary. They include a vaccine trial in which the prisoners were infected with tularemia, or rabbit fever, and proof of fluoride tablets to determine their effect on human blood.

In 1958, tranquilizers were tested in 90 prisoners.

Perhaps the most famous was the trial of the vaccine of cancer. Up to 160 prisoners were injected with live cancer cells.
The study, sponsored by Ohio State and the Research Institute Sloan-Kettering, operated from 1956 to 1961. Eventually, researchers said they lost track of most of the prisoners and therefore had no results.

Zadrick said that experiments like these would not be approved today. Have too many concerns about the scientific value, risks and if the prisoners and troops were driven to volunteer.

"This is a vulnerable population from which you could take advantage," he said.

Currently, researchers must ensure that the review committees that prove humans are fully aware of potential risks and benefits. This is called 'informed consent'.

Arthur Caplan, director of the Center for Bioethics at the University of Philadelphia, said it takes even more stringent protections. He said the U.S. investigations involve increasing evidence in humans in other countries, not always clear whether the same rules apply there.

And while industries such as pharmaceutical companies increased funding for research efforts, there are growing concerns about whether funding that are influencing the studies.

"The research itself is changing," said Caplan. "You do not want to monitor a research firm Century 21 with a guidance system of the 70's."

(*) For El Correo del Orinoco
 
Back
Top Bottom