As I’ve written before, I’m currently participating in a study of prophylactic radiation treatments to keep small cell lung cancer out of the brain. IIRC, the current standard practice is based on a study from the 1970s where n was small. I got randomized into the group that gets everything except the radiation itself; and once in a while I get a test of my cognitive abilities—probably something like the test that Trump misremembered, but more interesting.
I asked the research coordinator who’s working with me about whether the study might be in any danger; and she said that, although they’ve heard some rumors, it didn’t seem like the study that I’m in will have its funding cut. That’s good news for me personally since I feel fortunate to be able to do my tiny bit to help improve human knowledge.
She kindly sent me a link to the study details (https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04155034?term=s1827&rank=1 if anyone is interested). I didn’t understand most of it 
; but I didn’t spot any of the keywords that might flag the study as too “woke” for the folks who want to keep the rest of us asleep. (I had thought that the cognitive assessment might be controlled by things like socioeconomic status or educational attainment, but I didn’t see anything about controls at all. Maybe that’s in a different paper.)
I guess that the particular study that I’m in is OK; but we still need to do whatever we can to mitigate the likely gutting, not only of HHS under the anti-vaxxer, but also of science generally, and even education itself.
Unless I missed something, every Trump nominee that got a vote in the Senate, without exception, no matter how wackaloon, has been confirmed. Hegseth, Gabbard, Kennedy…seriously? I see no limit to the power of Trump and the Muskrats to dictate whatever. Our only hope seems to be the midterms next year…if we still have meaningful elections then.
I wish I were young and able enough to do something besides preach to the choir here on FtB.
There are various ways to control for things like socioeconomic status and education level in studies of this kind. If the disease is common you match the patients, so first one of any particular socioeconomic status, educational achievement etc. is randomly assigned, next one is put in whatever group the first patient wasn’t assigned, matched pairs. Somewhat less satisfactorily there are statistical accommodations that can be made. But in this case I suspect that you are all being measured against yourselves, so you don’t need to account for those factors.
Thanks, Jazzlet.
That kind of makes sense; and it feels like that during the tests—whether I’m getting worse and how rapidly; but the point of the study is to compare the effect of the radiation with its absense; so it seems like they’re going to have to compare participants with each other eventually.
The way it was explained to me is that both the cancer and the radiation can cause cognitive decline, so does the radiation make it better or worse?
Anyway, that’s my unscientific non-medical understanding.
“I wish I were young and able enough to do something besides preach to the choir here on FtB.”
You are able, Bill. First off, all of us need to get familiar with ALL our government representatives, Federal, State, and local. Then we need to let them know how we feel about current political events. It doesn’t matter if your reps are red or blue, THEY represent US, and they need to be reminded of that fact constantly.
Second, you are in a rather unique position WRT your participation in this study. Dig into it. Find the people who are at the interface between the science and the money and talk to them. Even if this particular study is fiscally solid, I’ll bet some of those people have some info on other good cancer research that is in danger. Find those facts, document them as best you can, and report them back to us so we can help spread the word! After all that, if you have any energy left, nurture some relationships with any journalists you think are worth their salt and tell them what you find out.