Question 21

[elanaminkoff]

I am having trouble understanding how A is correct.
I felt I had a pretty good understanding of the passage, and my map is as follows-
P1- introduction to concept of equipoise
P2- idea of Theoretical equipoise and why it is too strict and unreasonable for clinical trials
P3 & 4- introduction to clinical equipoise and how it is a more practical solution for clinical trials (this is the side of the scale the author falls on)

So with this question my though it that I am looking for something that would weaken the idea that CE is superior to TE, and the primary reason given for CE's superiority is because it is not based on a single doctors idea of neutrality, but rather the group as a whole. So a dingle doctor can have a preference (since thats human nature) but as long as the group of doctors as a whole does not lean heavily towards on drug we can have CE and carry on with the trial. I just am not seeing how A does this, perhaps it is because I am not understanding the answer correctly. I had selected E thinking that this answer rules out one of the main problems the author had with TE. My thought process was that even though this is not weakening CE, it is strengthening TE, and so it perhaps is undermining the need for CE.

Can someone please help clear this up for me.

Thanks

[einuoa]

I picked E at first too, but now I do see why A is correct.

My argument from the passage was that C.E is better than T.E because it allows the researchers to have an opinion without it being an ethical bar to participating in the trial.

My idea of weakening this argument was that -
1) It is an ethical bar in some way
2) Although C.E is more flexible, it is also missing something that T.E has that doesn't make C.E as useful to T.E

To address the other answers first

B) Who cares if they rarely ask to leave or not? I don't see how this weakens the answer choice or how it affects CE or TE differently.

C) Ethical oversight is decreasing? But CE & TE has also very rigorous ethical standards, so this doesn't affect one over the other.

D) They aren't even the ones conducing the clinical trials though, who cares what they prefer. We need some sort of hard fact here to weaken CE.

---
E) Rarely occurs that researchers w/ no preference later develop a strong preference. But what if they develop just a preference, it doesn't have to be a strong preference. This weaken choice is too restrictive because even without a strong preference, CE would still be more useful.

A) "Most comparative clinical trials" ; "main purpose"
These are pretty strong so far, and continuing on, it says that clinical trials' main purpose is to definitively prove a treatment considered best.

The purpose of equipose is to assume at the beginning that no treatment is currently superior and prove that one is superior by trials.
CE allows opinions and non-consensus as to which treatment is better because of differing opinions. CE requires an absence of consensus within the clinical community (line 47), and if the point of the clinical trials is to reach some overwhelming consensus, then CE doesn't fit the purpose of clinical trials at all.
- This goes along with my weaken (2) that I prefaced in the beginning, so in this way, TE could possibly be better.