Parexel Destroys Immune Systems, Not Liable

A reader writes: "The four TGN1412 test victims learned recently that they have no detectable t-cells, which makes it "likely" (read certain) they will suffer from numerous diseases and truncated lifespans. It has been determined that Parexel was negligent in its aftercare of the victims. The victims have already suffered severe injuries such as gangrene requiring the amputation of all toes and three fingers (without toes you cannot remain standing or walk, btw) and endured unimaginable agony. But it seems Parexel, despite having the moral responsibility for the outcome of its incompetence and the financial ability to pay proper restitution (estimated yearly revenue of $750 million) is ignoring the victims and using the legal system to avoid liability. The lessons are that $4000 is not worth risking your life over, that that is what you are doing if you are foolish enough to volunteer for medical testing whatever promises you receive not withstanding, and that if you are so foolish you will be left to die by the company responsible without legal recourse should things go wrong. In other words, only an ignorant would sign up for medical testing. I predict a decline in voluntary test subjects, and a rise in the use of prisoners and other 'disposable' human subjects."

Comments

T cells

[zerocommazero]

I luckily have a couple of extra T cells and would be willing to sell them as I could use the sick days. The bidding starts at $4,001.00 please....

Re:Cannot use prisoners

[Ant P.]

What's the law say about biological weapons testing?

Re:Decline my...

[Red Flayer]

Yeah, cause all test subjects are litterate and educated people

I'm not sure why, but I think I just voided the warranty on my irony drive train -- my irony-ometer is redlining.

Re:Ronald McDonald made me do it

[Anonymous Coward]

I wouldn't be so full of shit if McDonald's hadn't clogged my colon.

Re:Human testing is not the first step

[sylvandb]

There are loads of animals that these things get tested on before the jump is made to human testing. If animals die or are poorly affected, humans should not be tested. So there should be some idea about what the drug is supposed to do, and the given results make me wonder if the regular, long process was followed..

You should wonder. What with various "animal rights" organizations that imply (if not state outright) that animals are equal to humans, animal testing is being reduced.

Hmm, here's an idea... Step 1, minimal animal testing. Step 2, test on humans who claim to be equal to animals. Step 3, test on other humans.

That could work!

sdb

Re:Cannot use prisoners

[suffe]

We're working on changing quite a few laws right now. Might as well throw that one in. Thanks for the heads up.

GWB

Re:Not Funny- this is actually happening

[snowgirl]

First they were outsourcing our IT jobs, now they're outsourcing our test subject jobs? When will it end?

*promptly picks up her ticket to hell on her way off the stage*

Re: At least TRYING to find cures

[Mr2001]

The presenter said that you can ditch your $75/month supply of vitamins, and pick up a box of dog biscuits. "If you don't believe me, check the ingredients list. It's all there."

What the hell? I don't think I could go through $75 worth of vitamins in a month if my life depended on it. A bottle of 100 multi vitamins costs what, $8?