Many pharmaceutical giants try to justify clinical trials on humans to find out their (medicines’) efficacy so that they can be produced in large scale for the welfare of the whole humanity.
Essay 052
• Do you think it is right to conduct clinical trials on a few humans for the broader and larger interests of the whole humanity?

Clinical trials on humans have always been a bone of contention, and pharmaceutical giants clandestinely do such tests on poor people saying that it is for the general good of the world. In my perception, clinical trials on humans cannot be accepted on any count.

There is no denying the fact that humans are the most precious ones on this planet, and keeping their life going as long as possible is a matter of utmost importance. And for the same, medicine and medical care have a crucial role to play. However, ascertaining the efficacy of a new medicine does demand tests, and the normal practice is to run such tests on animals. But, the need for conducting such tests is on the rise due more to the mounting competition between pharmocos than to the need for developing remedial medicines.

All said and done, conducting clinical trials clandestinely or without legally binding consent is a crime against humanity because human life is no test lab and no human life is superior or inferior to any other life. So we cannot endorse the view that these tests are warranted for the well being of the whole humanity. Wellbeing of a person is as important as the wellbeing of another. This makes it clear that lives of a few cannot be sacrificed for the rest of the world. Life is so precious that no one is allowed to rule over it.

The above arguments make it clear that clinical trial on humans is anti-human . And, the arguement that ‘a few lives for the wellbeing of a larger world’ is ridiculous and against all human values. There are alternatives.

275 words