Congratulations! Your comment has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.

The 'terminally ill' do still qualify for small and large clinical trials, but the severity and complication of their illness will effect their acceptance to a study group. The best study subjects are going to be young, otherwise healthy individuals with a supportive family, close proximity to the research hospital, and a upbeat attitude in the face of the challenges ahead!

Here's a decent read about clinical trials in general: http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/info/understand
You might be interested in the 'Phases' part, describing the size of participant pools. You might also be interested in seeing some of the recently approved devices/procedures (they include scans of the letters sent out, which I always find interesting): http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/ProductsandMedicalProcedures/DeviceApprovalsandClearances/Recently-ApprovedDevices/ucm241143.htm

One last thing to note; you can follow products funded by the government (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/sbir.htm for instance) as they progress by digging through the interwebs. Private companies can get a peak at their publicly funded competition sometimes, which,... well, is actually usually not as useful as you'd think.

>> ^quantumushroom:

Common sense would dictate that drug companies be allowed to offer deals to terminally ill patients, perhaps in exchange for paying for their care. But the FDA is there to make sure common sense is kept locked away.

In my opinion your cynicism is misplaced.

This is an industry full of people who live for the thrill of discovery and the emotional excitement of helping individuals live longer and happier lives. That said, it is difficult to get approval for novel, invasive treatments... and for good reason; unforeseeable complications can have life-altering consequences.

This current system greatly favors established companies who have the resources to build and equip a team to successfully navigate the approval processes (and absorb the fallout of a failure). An industry partner is often times THE ONLY way for a University-affiliated biomedical researcher to see their discovery possibly implemented. Another option is a group of matriculating grad students devoting their early careers to hounding venture capitalists, angel investors, grant agencies and established companies to invest in their startup... typically this involves traveling till exhaustion, and constantly hearing how great ones idea is while receiving no call backs... only the best ideas with the most patient, stubborn and lucky supporters survive.

>> ^quantumushroom:

Like any "suppressed" invention, it's way easier for the established companies to simply buy the patent (while getting their 'friends' in government to thwart progess) and also way easier for the inventors to take a large buyout instead of spending possible decades getting a product to market, especially drugs.

Common sense would dictate that drug companies be allowed to offer deals to terminally ill patients, perhaps in exchange for paying for their care. But the FDA is there to make sure common sense is kept locked away.

Everything you've stated is true, and the fadeouts of these potential 'cures' certainly don't sell papers like hype does.



>> ^bamdrew:

These are costly and typically slow-moving ventures. A lot of waiting for approvals, signing up and weeding through subjects, processing collected data, etc.. Many promising ideas get lost in the ~4-8 years from rodent animal model to large human trials (researchers leave the project following new ideas, funding dries up, etc.).
One trick you'll often see if you look for it is the country the initial human data is collected in; Portugal (and Scandinavian countries to an extent) has laws with a higher tolerance for experimental use of clinically approved devices and devices shown to be biocompatible than the US, so you'll see a group from Purdue in the middle of Indiana gathering data with surgical staff and subjects who are in Portugal.
The study you cite is also surgically invasive, and the obese subjects are not going to be the healthiest people out there... the fear of random health complications can keep project leaders up at night, and can quietly kill a project if they're bad enough. Related to the study you cite, I'm aware of vagal nerve stimulation being researched for treating depression... in other words, systems in the body that seem straightforward often reveal themselves to be a part of complex, intertwined feedback loops.

>> ^quantumushroom:
While far from a conspiracy nut, I notice that fat-reducing products that have great potential (and even actual results) are never seen nor heard from again. In America alone the 'diet industry' is 40 billion a year.

Two I remember:

Intra-abdominal vagal blocking (VBLOC therapy): clinical results with a new implantable medical device
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18549888


There was also a pill that mimicked exercise (stuck at the mouse phase).
Both of these items are from 2007-2008.

Like any "suppressed" invention, it's way easier for the established companies to simply buy the patent (while getting their 'friends' in government to thwart progess) and also way easier for the inventors to take a large buyout instead of spending possible decades getting a product to market, especially drugs.


>> ^Psychologic:



>> ^quantumushroom:
There was also a pill that mimicked exercise (stuck at the mouse phase).
Both of these items are from 2007-2008.

I read somewhere that they had begun human trials on that stuff, but it was in an article so who knows.
From what I read that drug caused the mitochondria to multiply (like during intense exercise), but it doesn't help other things like oxygen usage and cardio conditioning. There was something about it increasing lactic acid production in athletes, but I didn't dig too deep on the subject.
On performance drugs, I wonder how much resistance comes from the "clean sports" mentality. Lots of stuff (ex- steroids) have a lot of downsides, so it would be interesting to see if a relatively safe performance enhancer would be generally welcome if not designed specifically to address a medical problem.

>> ^bamdrew:

>> ^EMPIRE:
>>
I'm not morbidly obese. I'm just lazy and a bit overweight lol

Thass about what I figured. What you probably want is intestinal parasites. Thats a pretty lazy way to loose weight... and the pale vampire look is totally hot right now.


I said absolutely safe. I don't think looking like a cadaver is exactly a sign of health

These are costly and typically slow-moving ventures. A lot of waiting for approvals, signing up and weeding through subjects, processing collected data, etc.. Many promising ideas get lost in the ~4-8 years from rodent animal model to large human trials (researchers leave the project following new ideas, funding dries up, etc.).

One trick you'll often see if you look for it is the country the initial human data is collected in; Portugal (and Scandinavian countries to an extent) has laws with a higher tolerance for experimental use of clinically approved devices and devices shown to be biocompatible than the US, so you'll see a group from Purdue in the middle of Indiana gathering data with surgical staff and subjects who are in Portugal.

The study you cite is also surgically invasive, and the obese subjects are not going to be the healthiest people out there... the fear of random health complications can keep project leaders up at night, and can quietly kill a project if they're bad enough. Related to the study you cite, I'm aware of vagal nerve stimulation being researched for treating depression... in other words, systems in the body that seem straightforward often reveal themselves to be a part of complex, intertwined feedback loops.


>> ^quantumushroom:

While far from a conspiracy nut, I notice that fat-reducing products that have great potential (and even actual results) are never seen nor heard from again. In America alone the 'diet industry' is 40 billion a year.

Two I remember:

Intra-abdominal vagal blocking (VBLOC therapy): clinical results with a new implantable medical device
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18549888


There was also a pill that mimicked exercise (stuck at the mouse phase).
Both of these items are from 2007-2008.

>> ^quantumushroom:

There was also a pill that mimicked exercise (stuck at the mouse phase).
Both of these items are from 2007-2008.


I read somewhere that they had begun human trials on that stuff, but it was in an article so who knows.

From what I read that drug caused the mitochondria to multiply (like during intense exercise), but it doesn't help other things like oxygen usage and cardio conditioning. There was something about it increasing lactic acid production in athletes, but I didn't dig too deep on the subject.

On performance drugs, I wonder how much resistance comes from the "clean sports" mentality. Lots of stuff (ex- steroids) have a lot of downsides, so it would be interesting to see if a relatively safe performance enhancer would be generally welcome if not designed specifically to address a medical problem.

>> ^EMPIRE:

>>
I'm not morbidly obese. I'm just lazy and a bit overweight lol


Thass about what I figured. What you probably want is intestinal parasites. Thats a pretty lazy way to loose weight... and the pale vampire look is totally hot right now.

>> ^bamdrew:

Stomach stapling and other medical interventions are intended to get someone to a state where they can then comfortably exercise, prepare their own (healthier) meals, and otherwise change unhealthy habits that are keeping them inactive and shortening their lives.
The safest action would be to consult two physicians (or more), and discuss whether medical aids are an appropriate first step for you.
I have an Aunt who had her stomach stapled (~300 lbs at 5'4", now down to ~200 lbs), and her improving health has definitely helped her and her immediate family in many ways well beyond simply her appearance.

>> ^EMPIRE:
If something like this was absolutely safe, I would absolutely use it.



I'm not morbidly obese. I'm just lazy and a bit overweight lol

>> ^dag:

I'm too lazy to read the article, but that quote at least seems to be just deriding previous studies - not disproving its efficacy. I should probably read the article.>> ^Gallowflak:
"A meta analysis found that studies supporting hCG for weight loss were of poor methodological quality and concluded that "there is no scientific evidence that HCG is effective in the treatment of obesity; it does not bring about weight-loss or fat-redistribution, nor does it reduce hunger or induce a feeling of well-being."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1365103/?tool=pmcentrez - citation from the Wikipedia article on the subject.



Probably, Dag. It's a summary of the results and conclusion of the analysis, not its argument.

I know nothing about this subject, FYI. Still. Science!

Stomach stapling and other medical interventions are intended to get someone to a state where they can then comfortably exercise, prepare their own (healthier) meals, and otherwise change unhealthy habits that are keeping them inactive and shortening their lives.

The safest action would be to consult two physicians (or more), and discuss whether medical aids are an appropriate first step for you.

I have an Aunt who had her stomach stapled (~300 lbs at 5'4", now down to ~200 lbs), and her improving health has definitely helped her and her immediate family in many ways well beyond simply her appearance.


>> ^EMPIRE:

If something like this was absolutely safe, I would absolutely use it.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

I'm too lazy to read the article, but that quote at least seems to be just deriding previous studies - not disproving its efficacy. I should probably read the article.>> ^Gallowflak:

"A meta analysis found that studies supporting hCG for weight loss were of poor methodological quality and concluded that "there is no scientific evidence that HCG is effective in the treatment of obesity; it does not bring about weight-loss or fat-redistribution, nor does it reduce hunger or induce a feeling of well-being."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1365103/?tool=pmcentrez - citation from the Wikipedia article on the subject.

In reply to this comment by inveigle:
Would you happen to have a reputable link or site I could purchase from? I am quite interested.

In reply to this comment by deathcow:
LOL @ HCG not working. I've seen 5 people EVAPORATE on it before my eyes. Oh it works, there is zero doubt.

In reply to this comment by inveigle:
Would you happen to have a reputable link or site I could purchase from? I am quite interested.

In reply to this comment by deathcow:
LOL @ HCG not working. I've seen 5 people EVAPORATE on it before my eyes. Oh it works, there is zero doubt.



I think it's a highly faked item. I have seen different results from different HCG vendors in our area. It is best to research HCG "weight loss clinics" I think in your area and look for reviews. It is common to see both pill and injectable forms. I have seen both forms work astoundingly well.