this post was submitted on 12 Aug 2023
148 points (100.0% liked)

chapotraphouse

13 readers
1 users here now

Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.

No anti-natilasm posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer

Vaush posts go in the_dunk_tank

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 22 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (13 children)

In the article, no one is saying anything bad about this Chinese company having devised a cheaper technique (they're charging $75K USD vs others charging ~$400K USD). The complaint is against decreased oversight and individual hospitals misusing the treatment and causing harm in the name of profit:

There is concern among researchers, regulatory experts and drugmakers themselves that allowing hospitals to market treatments for a fee could cause profit-making to trump ethical considerations. In a 2016 case widely reported in the Chinese media, a 22-year-old college student with a rare type of tissue cancer called synovial sarcoma died after going through an experimental cell therapy at a Beijing hospital.

“Hospitals can become both players and referees at the same time”

Before his death, the patient posted an essay online claiming the hospital had falsely advertised the treatment’s effectiveness, and that Chinese search engine Baidu Inc. had displayed the hospital’s advertising so that it appeared like a credible search result rather than a paid commercial. The essay went viral and sparked an outcry on Chinese social media over the ethics of private hospitals and the regulation of therapies for serious illnesses.

Censured by the Cyberspace Administration of China, Baidu responded by restricting the number of sponsored posts to 30% of a results page, and established a 1 billion yuan fund to fight fraud. The hospital did not respond to requests for comment.

load more comments (10 replies)