Secret blood-substitute trial may have been lethal (2018)

> But the Polyheme trial was one of 15 no-consent studies permitted by the FDA since 1996, when it began allowing researchers to enroll patients in clinical trials without their permission if the treatment showed enough potential to save lives.

After WW2, some German doctors and government officials were executed for doing this sort of thing. Experimenting on living humans without their informed consent is a crime against humanity, especially if authorized by a government.

Time and again, it is proven true that not learning from the past causes you to repeat every mistake/crime of the past. Living by "the ends justifies the means" blinds you to the causes of your mistakes; arrogance is blinding and, ironically, also inefficient.

You can't blame this crime-as-policy on just one political party, since both parties have had plenty of power and opportunity over the last ~30 years to stop or prevent these no-consent studies. In a just world, the responsible parties (in the government and in the medical industry) would at least be imprisoned, but a lot of people are at least partially responsible. And we all know that this crime-as-policy will be memory-holed as much as the government can do so; and any remaining ire from the US citizenry will be deflected to a few politically-expendable individuals (e.g. the current FDA chief, or some CEOs). This is a systemic problem, that can only be solved through systemic changes, which will never occur; only tokens will be offered to reduce effects on election outcomes.

Incidentally, there is no "No-consent Study" article on Wikipedia. And the blood substitute articles give no mention of no-consent studies. I wonder if any of the investors in the companies conducting these studies even knew that they were funding crimes against humanity.