Refine
Year of publication
- 2016 (3) (remove)
Language
- English (3) (remove)
Keywords
- clinical research (3) (remove)
The most important attribute for which we all aspire as human beings is good health because it enables us to undertake different forms of activities of daily living. The emergence of scientific knowledge in Western societies has enabled us to explore and define several parameters of “health” by drawing boundaries around factors that are known to impact the achievement of good health. For example, the World Health Organization defined health by taking physical and psychological factors into consideration.
Ever since the 1996 revision of the Declaration of Helsinki, the World Medical Association has attempted to address ethical and scientific concerns of its diverse stakeholders for Articles 33 (use of placebo) and 34 (posttrial provisions), most recently in 2013. Both are inextricably linked to standard of care, an essential element of any comparative, interventional clinical trial. But has this now 20-year-long ethical debate truly been put to rest? The choice of standard of care in clinical trials remains a complex issue, particularly for comparative trials conducted in emerging countries.
A decline in the CD4 count is a common feature in HIV/AIDS, suggesting a compromise in immunity of patients. In response, highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) is prescribed to slow-down a diminution in the CD4 count and risk of AIDS-related malignancies. However, exercise may improve both the utility and population of innate immune cell components, and may be beneficial for patients with HIV infection. Comparing the effects of different exercises against HAART, on CD4 count, helps in understanding the role and evidence-based application of exercises to ameliorate immune deficiency.
