[vidarh]

The harm is that these patients and their families lose the tiny amount of time together they'd otherwise have left, because the patient is put in a coma.

It's a difficult trade-off for a lot of high risk medical interventions to judge the relative worth of the potential chance of survival vs. that last remaining time, and it's certainly not a choice we can objectively make on behalf of other people.

In this case it's not certain the protocol have helped any patients. If it did help, then the success rate is so low that there are ethical issues with overselling the potential vs. giving people that extra time together.

If a patient wants to try, I'd be all for giving them that choice. But there's a big gap from letting a patient ask for something and promoting it as the recommended course of action without evidence of any efficacy.

[greiskul]

Well, are you aware of how death by rabies happens? Way better for you and your family if you die in a coma, then to have to watch you going through it consciously. If I had rabies in a stage where death is certain, the options I would be looking at would be either the Milwaukee protocol or euthanasia. The other option (doing nothing) doesn't just means death, it means painfully, awful death.

[vidarh]

If people want to take that option, then I'd be fine with that. But it's not for anyone to decide on behalf of others. If MP has no effect - and it's very possible it's effectiveness is actually zero, as we don't know if it was what saved Giese, - then it is wildly unethical to give unjustified hope to people, especially when this will prevent doctors from trying to find other options that might at least give them a chance.