Representing the “full measure of humanity”: Belén Garijo on the importance of increasing diversity in clinical trials

Fueled by new biomedical technologies and unprecedented collaboration, pharmaceutical companies are rapidly developing and testing vaccines for SARS CoV-2 coronavirus. However, this swift pace of vaccine development might lead to “a potentially risky lack of diversity in clinical trials,” according to Belén Garijo, a healthcare executive and former doctor. Her October 9, 2020 essay in TIME explains how this lack of diversity is not a new problem: certain population groups have been historically underrepresented in clinical trials, which limits how well doctors and researchers can study the efficacy of the treatments and medicines being tested.

Belén Garijo, "We Must Use This Moment to Improve Diversity in Clinical Trials — And Not Just for Vaccines," TIME, 9 October 2020

 

1. According to Garijo, what populations are typically underrepresented in experimental medicine trials? Which populations are overrepresented? What are the two reasons Garijo cites for this complicated, “persistent lack of diversity in clinical trials”?
   
2. Garijo uses transitions strategically to guide her readers through her argument, such as calling attention to where she introduces examples or counters a naysayer perspective. Look at how she uses transitions both within and between her paragraphs. Locate one transition you think is particularly effective. What does it signal to the reader? Use the list of transitions in Chapter 8 to review the functions of commonly used transitions to help you identify how Garjio’s transitions operate in her argument.
3. Garijo argues that the lack of diversity in clinical trials demands “industry-wide action.” Why? Compose a “So what?” statement using a template from Chapter 7 to summarize what Garijo argues is at stake here, both for the SARS CoV-2 coronavirus vaccine as well as for other treatments and experimental medicines. Where in her essay do you see her addressing the larger “So what?” and “Who cares?” questions for increasing diversity in clinical trials? Why do you think she places these statements here?
4. Garijo insists that the lack of racial diversity in clinical trials has serious consequences for patients, healthcare professionals, and researchers. This lack of diversity is not limited to clinical trials, however. Author Caroline Criado Perez researches the problems of the “gender data gap,” in which the male body and male experience are used as the default in product design. Watch this video, where Perez explains how the gender data gap can help us understand why women are more likely to be seriously injured in car accidents than men. What surprised you in the video? What do you think can be done to address this gender data gap? How are the potential solutions to the gender data gap similar to the solutions Garijo suggests for diversifying clinical trials?

Comments

[Tyra Elliot]

The main objective of Garijo's article "Full Measure of Humanity" Is to show that certain indiviuals are underrepresented when it comes to clinical trials such as females, Blacks, Latinx. Meanwhile Asians and males are over represented when it comes to clinical trials. I really like how Garijo counters naysayers perspective about the dangers of not representing each group accurately. Garijo says "To do otherwise will risk not just the creation of insufficient or potentially ineffective treatments, but will also foster additional skepticism toward medical science from those who are inclined to doubt such expertise." I feel this signaled to the reader "who cares" and "so what" statements. I think Garijo places these statements to put detail on how people being unrepresented effects all of us. In regards to the video "Invisible Women" by Caroline Criado Perez explains why women are more likely to be severely injured in a car crash then men. Primarily because they never test the cars to see if they are suitable for women drivers, which is incredibly surprising to hear . I personally just assumed that female test dummies existed, but sadly they don't. The research from both of the articles compare the disparities in clinical trials and data and why it is so important. They both bring evidence on the differences between the underrepresented group and the overrepresented group.

[alexis morales]

I believe that it is essential for there to be more of a diversity included in clinical trials. In most clinical trials, there is not a large percentage of minorities. This can cause major issues. It is understandable when people are hesitant to participate in these trials because it is fear of the unknown. Although this may be the case this leaves a bigger fear of the unknown: figuring out if the treatment is suitable for everyone. Data studied in these trials are not completely reliable to all because we are not all the same. When it comes down to “who cares” or “what does it matter”, it does because we are all human. We should all be able to have the same access to medical treatment but unfortunately, we are not. This is becoming a global issue that is not only limited to certain illnesses. We lack studies of a variety that will be able to work for everyone. We must be able to find ways to help those who feel as if they will not be. I believe that people who struggle also become hesitant because they are unsure it is an affordable treatment that will be produced one day. To be able to make these changes we all must come together to find a solution and continue to invest in the future of helping everyone safely.