Most would want treatments, survey finds

In telephone surveys commissioned by the researchers, King County residents were asked whether they would want experimental treatments if they found themselves being transported to a hospital because of cardiac arrest or major trauma.

Specifically, they were asked about a newer, stronger version of the saline fluid now given to improve blood pressure in trauma victims. And they were asked about variations in the timing of CPR and defibrillator shocks for people in cardiac arrest.

Generally, most people said they would want the experimental treatments, even though they wouldn't have had an opportunity to consent and didn't know whether they were better or worse than standard treatments.

Here's a sampling of answers:

Those who thought exceptions to consent rules were justified:

• If you are injured and there are medical people there, you should trust them to make the right decision.

• There must be experiments.

• Anything that might improve the chance of survival is good.

• That's the only way we'll know how to do something.

• The paramedics have my best interest at heart.

• You've got to try something new to try to help people.

• I just think that more people should get involved in research like this.

Those who had concerns:

• Would poor people be lab mice?

• I would have it tested on somebody else rather than myself first.

• I'm afraid of being a guinea pig, especially on experimenting.

• I don't think that anything experimental should be given without consent. There are plenty of losers in jail that you can just use.

• What if these methods are worse and people lose their lives because of it?

• Someone might sue you.

• I think it's underhanded in that you can do the research without consent.

Carol M. Ostrom