It is true that some off-label drug use is based on very unsettled science and has more risks. But medicine - and not just cancer care - involves lots of hard choices. And the more serious the disorder, often the more likely it is that for every right and wrong treatment choice there are many other practical decisions painted in shades of gray.
Interpretation
Medical decisions often involve difficult choices and uncertainties.
This quote highlights the complexity of medical decision-making, particularly in cases involving off-label drug use. It suggests that while there are established treatments, there are many scenarios where choices are not clear-cut, and decisions must be made amidst uncertainty and varying degrees of risk, reflecting the complexities of healthcare.
In practice
During a medical conference discussing treatment options for complex conditions.
Science offers the chance to cure debilitating and once-intractable disorders like hemophilia and sickle cell disease. But we need to make sure the ability to access these therapies, or the risk that someone can be locked out of them, doesn't widen gaps between the rich and poor.
In fast moving fields like cancer, where doctors tailor treatments based on evidence that's constantly evolving, two years can be an eternity of waiting to learn about important science. For some patients, that interval can be fatal.
We need to make sure that access to a curative drug doesn't become a yardstick by which poverty is eventually measured. Doing so requires a shared commitment between innovators and the insurance plans that are harder pressed to offer these advances to the poor.
I always think of space-time as being the real substance of space, and the galaxies and the stars just like the foam on the ocean.
There is something fascinating about science. One gets such wholesale returns of conjecture out of such a trifling investment of fact.
I must confess it was very unexpected and I am very startled at my metamorphosis into a chemist.
Opponents say natural selection is not a theory supported by observation or experiment; that it is not based on fact; and that it cannot be proved. Well, no, you cannot prove the theory to people who won't believe in it any more than you can prove that the Battle of Hastings took place in 1066. However, we know the battle happened then, just as we know the course of evolution on earth unambiguously shows that Darwin was right.
Let both sides seek to invoke the wonders of science instead of its terrors. Together let us explore the stars, conquer the deserts, eradicate disease, tap the ocean depths, and encourage the arts and commerce.
The fundamentalists deny that evolution has taken place; they deny that the earth and the universe as a whole are more than a few thousand years old, and so on. There is ample scientific evidence that the fundamentalists are wrong in these matters, and that their notions of cosmogony have about as much basis in fact as the Tooth Fairy has.
Subscribe for the occasional hand-picked quote. No noise.