5 Comments
User's avatar
⭠ Return to thread
Copernicus's avatar

My understanding is that it’s pretty standard to exclude pregnant women, breastfeeding women, and people with chronic health conditions from new drug studies.

Expand full comment
Jaye's avatar

That may be so, but you don't then, expound on the safety of a drug in that demographic

Expand full comment
ConcernedGrammy's avatar

That's true, but it's not standard to then have overall broad approval (and coercion) of those same groups to go get the same drug the trials excluded them from. We all watched as it was pushed on pregnant women to get the shot. Protect themselves AND their baby. The stats on the outcome of those recommendations are heartbreaking.

Expand full comment
Peace's avatar

Do other trials then follow up and do trials on the excluded high-risk populations? My logical brain thinks that might be a pretty good idea!!

Expand full comment
Copernicus's avatar

In theory, yes.

In reality, often not.

And yes, that IS a really good idea. Indeed.

My understanding of pregnancy trials is that usually any data is based on use of said product in women who didn’t know they were pregnant whilst using the product. After that has happened “x” number of times, without apparent untoward effects, it becomes generally acceptable to use the product during pregnancy, assuming the dr “weighs risks and benefits.” And we all know how that turns out nowadays.

Expand full comment