Saturday, February 9, 2013

Just One More Risk: Russian Enthusiasm for Participation in Medical Research


In the United States, participants in medical studies reported to the Economic Cycle Research Institute that they were motivated to take part in research based on trust in their physicians, the potential to aid future patients, or because they believed the study provided the best available treatment.  In Russia, the basis for participation is different.  A recent New York Times article, “Russians Eagerly Participate in Medical Experiments, Despite Risks,” describes how Russian citizens are increasingly enduring the dangerous side effects of drug trials.  Why do Russians undergo this ordeal?  It is the only means to access any form of medical care. 
            Sometimes, the outcome proves to be worth the risk, or at least according to the participant.  Galina I. Malinina injected herself daily with an experimental weight loss serum, and then enthusiastically tolerated two weeks of intense vomiting as a result.  However, at the conclusion of the study, she related the pleasant results of increased energy, fitness, and even quality of life.  While this case demonstrates a positive example, there are all-too-often serious side effects and no results to show for it.  On various occasions, the ingestion of experimental antibiotics by Russian research subjects has resulted in allergic reactions, loss of bowel control, vomiting, dizziness and various of other negative side effects.
            While pharmaceutical companies maintain that these trials are intended to be experiments rather than treatments, Russians readily offer their voluntary consent to act as guinea pigs and hope for the best.  The Russian government has encouraged the practice by signing a 2010 law that mandates that foreign drugs must be tested on Russians before entering the domestic market.  Though there are undeniable economic benefits of conducting medical studies locally, the participants’ motives and the possible side effects raise the question of whether or not the benefits outweigh the risks.
            The vast majority of these trials involve significant risks to the patients’ health.  However, in the eyes of Russian participants, the benefits seem to far exceed any potential risk of harm.  Americans generally have alternative means to seek treatment, and thus predominantly focus on side effects and the potential negative consequences.  In contrast, Russians do not dwell on the risks, and instead place precedence on the benefits.  To them, medical research is just one more risk in life, and the chance of a positive outcome will virtually always trump the risk.
To a Westerner, there is obviously something that seems wrong with this Russian phenomenon of eager research participants.  But is there truly an ethical problem?  Principle 16 of the Helsinki Declaration states that “The responsibility for the protection of research subjects must always rest with the physician or other health care professional and never the research subjects, even though they have given consent.”  Based on this notion, the physicians and medical personnel who are conducting the studies are at fault for not exhibiting adequate concern for the research subjects, even if the participants have provided voluntary informed consent.  Nevertheless, there seems to be no clear-cut solution.  Russian citizens cannot simply be prevented from participating without being provided with a reasonable alternative means to access medical care.  Furthermore, there is no authority that is willing and able to implement a change in policy.  Unless the Russian state or society as a whole can come up with a better option for these citizens, it seems that each individual is entitled to make an autonomous decision as to whether or not to participate in a potentially dangerous medical study.



  
  

No comments: