Medical Trials (trials4us) Anyone Done It Before?

[emzino]

I'm sure most of you are aware of what happens. You go in for a short period of time to test out some drugs on your body or something of the sort and you walk away with some money for your time.

But what really happens? Is it really as dangerous as people say or is it not that bad?

 

[auditek]

stuff that, remember that crew couple of years ago, i think down in london ? a couple of them nearly died, heads balooned twice than normal size, never heard how they recovered , if fully or any lasting damage,
no thanks.

 

[motorbikez]

I'd second the above you'd have to be very desparate or insane to risk your health for any amount of money.

 

[fingermouse]

youy would be better off with a gun and playing Russian roulette...


now who do we know with a gun ?????? or 3

 

[Nilz]

LOL...anyone for a big head????

how about a blown off head???

Did someone call Sidi???

F**k that, no chance mate, just not worth the risk, value your life

 

[voorhees]

do it and post pics please

 

[benr]

stuff that, remember that crew couple of years ago, i think down in london ? a couple of them nearly died, heads balooned twice than normal size, never heard how they recovered , if fully or any lasting damage,
no thanks.

I actually think some of them died from what i remember.

To be honest on the whole i dont think its that dangerous as it will have been extensively tested on similar species. I dont think many people die or it would be publicised more.

I heard they target students at student fairs etc. I never saw any of them when i was a student but probably would have considered it. Apparently good money for the risk. If you do have an adverse reaction you will get good treatment.

That reminds me theres an american comedy just finished called "testees" its really good.

They should just get all the bums/beggars and test on them

 

[motorbikez]

They should just get all the bums/beggars and test on them

If you mean the government just say it I'm sure those useless scumbags could do with a few more quid.

 

[EssVier]

do it and post pics please

Never know, could be a real hoot lol!

Cant be anymore dangerous than stepping out into the world every day, risking life and limb on the stressed out commute to work
Now, where did I put that adrenochrome?

 

[JJon]

Doing medical trials is far less dramatic than people here are suggesting. I have done one and a few friends of mine have done quite a few (one of my friends does it actually as a 'job'!).

You have got to think that thousands of medical trials are happening all the time and when it goes wrong like it did with the Paraxel incident, it is rare. Also, you can decide what type of risk you want to take (it is usually reflected in the pay).
The one I did was very low risk - it was a cream they put on you and there were no side effects what so ever. Also, very often you can join medical trials after several groups have done the same one before you so you can ask what happened to the previous groups.

That's is of course not to say that there are not risks and the pay is reflected in this. One friend of mine did have a bad reaction to one where he had flu-like symptoms all weekend.

Some places like Flucamp are virtually risk free as you get given a cold and they analysis how it is spread. That's £3000 for two weeks.

They are incredibly boring so you are more likely to battle against boredom than symptoms! I am a self confessed hypochondriac and even I would do them. It's very easy for people to say - DONT DO THEM! but they probably are not in the situation where they really need the money.

I have written about all my experiences of paid medical trials on my blog (don't worry - it's not a sales site or anything) - http://cashalerts.co.uk/2010/05/medical-trials-jobs-the-facts/

All the best!

 

[sidibear]

Hmmm, a member who has just joined, says its ok and has a blog about how safe it is?

Well, I don't know about you lot but I'm convinced

They banned testing on animals because it was cruel, do you view yourself as less important than a lab rat?
Your body your choice at the end of the day.
If it was up to me though, I would get inmates to take part

 

[JJon]

Hi
Thanks for your reply. I don't agree though. Everything has an element of risk - getting in your, having too much to drink, extreme sports etc. The percentage of medical trials that have any problems are tiny compared to the amount that go on. Every pill you take would have been put through a thorough process of clinical trials. If someone cant eat, pay the bills, face eviction or whatever and are offered £3000 for two weeks in a hospital doing something that is relatively safe then the dont value themselves less than a lab rat - they are doing it because they need to.

Medical trials really aren't that big a deal. You only hear the bad things and drug companies are paranoid about anything going wrong.

They banned testing on animals because they did not have a choice in the matter.

I agree - it is not the most ideal way to make money. There is that small element of risk but funnily enough, by the end you have sort of detoxed - no caffeine - no alcohol - no ciggies! (not even poppy seeds as strange that sounds!).

Regarding inmates (and I know you said it in jest but others have said this before) - all that would happen there is that the drug companies would make even more money by saving a fortune in paying out the costs - plus any inmate would jump at the chance to sit around do nothing, playing pool, watching TV all day ... (oh hold on - they already do!)

All the best everyone!

 

[sidibear]

The money the drug companies save by using inmates could be used to pay for more research in to things like cancer. Isn't it lack of funding that prevents more research ?

If someone wants to do it then its purely up to them, it would be bad of them to base such a decision on financial circumstance though. As a way to help pay for a holiday, or car yes, but not because they are financially destitute and its their last option.

I wasn't speaking in jest by suggesting inmates. They have comitted a crime against society, it could be a good way for them to pay back a bit of their debt to society that is funding them to be in there.

Can I ask what links you have to the medical research industry?

 

[JJon]

Hi mate

I have no links to the medical research industry whatsover. I have views on many topics but not linked to them in anyway. I just have a opinion about medical trials because I have done one and many of my friends have done them so I know quite a bit about it. I also researched it more for one of my blog posts including safety records - I'm not trying to 'promote' medical trials - just give a balanced picture.

If someone is financial destitute I don't think it is a bad option because they would be doing something to get them themselves of a situation if nobody is willing to help. These trials are so safe so why would they not? Out of the friends I have one does it as a 'living' (not the most orthodox drugs I grant you!), one did it purely for a fancy holiday (he has a normal job too and it was a trial he did at weekends) and the other used to work in broadcasting (behind the scenes) and was unable to meet his financial commitments - he earned £5000 over 5 weeks and didn't have to claim a penny in Job Seekers Allowance or housing benefit - plus he was perfectly fine.

Of course there is risk - some trials are more risky than others. I am a self confessed hypochondriac but the one I did was just having a cream applied - approx 150 people before me had it done and everyone was fine so the small risk was worth the good money - others are more extreme that I would never consider. Also, the one I went on was full of people from all walks of life - several of which, believe it or not, were using it as a holiday because you are cut off from the outside world.

The Paraxel incident was back in 2006 and the drug companies will be even ore paranoid about safety after that - I have not heard of any such incident since and can't remember before.

Regarding the inmates - well, I think we will have to agree to disagree on that one. If medical trials were very dangerous then I disagree with the principle of human medical trials, inmate or non inmate. If they are relatively safe (which they are) then it's hardly a punishment anyway - if they were doing the medical trials, other people would not have the opportunities to do them and need to claim more from the state.

Great debate though sidibear!

All the best,

 

[JJon]

sorry - I meant orthodox 'jobs' rather than 'drugs'!

 

[sidibear]

Thank you for an excellent response. I only asked if you were connected in anyway to see if you were putting across a balanced view, which I now know you are. You are obviously speaking from experience rather than a position of interest.

Do you think that the people entering into such trials should have to show their medical records to eliminate any unforseen reactions?
I myself am allergic to insect stings to which end I carry an epipen. If I was to take part in a trial that exposed me to such risk and hadn't pre informed about my allergy it would negate the results as the conclusion would be that it could set off anaphylaxis in people who were not at risk of it. But if I did declare it would they still go ahead knowing? I also have a very low white cell count. If this wasn't declared then the test results would show that the particular product I was testing results in a low white cell count, thus again negating the results.

 

[JJon]

Hi

That's a very good point. There are basically two types of medical trials - ones for 'healthy volunteers' and ones with a certain condition which the trial is trying to find a solution for. Most tend to be for healthy volunteers. If you are healthy then they are quite easy to get onto. When I say 'healthy' I mean you can't be taking any regular medication, have no previous medical problems and, most of the time, be a non smoker. You even have to have a certain blood pressure.

You go on a 'screening' first to test you for alcohol, weight, blood pressure, blood test etc and if you pass all that they will contact your GP. If there have been any problems in the past you are immediately barred.

Someone like you could probably not do a medical trial because of your low white blood count and allergy. However, if they were testing a new allergy drug then you would obviously be considered.

Someone I knew fitted all the criteria for being 'healthy' - he passed all the tests but on the screening day he had slightly high blood pressure and was refused (and blood pressure can change even during the day). I think many people are economical with the truth when it comes to drinking however. You are not supposed to drink more than the daily guidance amount and when asked, everybody always says ' "well, I never drink during the week and I might perhaps have a couple of pints during the weekend' hmmm (us Brits are not that sensible!)....

So basically to your question, yes - there are really strict when it comes to the screening. Because of the money is so attractive to people they must get people lying all the time but there is no point because the medical records show everything.

All the best!

 

[sidibear]

I don't drink but I do smoke, like a 1970's Cortina !

My last allergy test went bad when I started to feel sick and became all itchy. I told the nurse I was going anaphylatic but she didn't believe me. I was trying to get out of the chair to lie down and get my legs raised and she had a right go at me. Its only when I started to struggle to breathe she realised something was up. She went to get the doctor and when he arrived I had already got an auto injector stuck in my leg.

Nope, seriously don't think the trials are for me

But hey, good discussion.