Evaluating the argument

Not at all concerned. Rather than assuming we know what’s best for others, we should trust people to make decisions for themselves. If anything, such compensation will enable participants to finally get paid what their contribution is worth, thus reducing the level of exploitation of participants in these studies.

Minimally concerned. Sure, this level of compensation will encourage many more people to participate in medical studies, and for some this will be an irrational decision driven by desperation. However, it would be easy enough to screen applicants and only accept those whose decision to participate is sufficiently informed, competent, and rational.

Somewhat concerned. It’s quite likely that such compensation will push desperate people to participate in studies that could exploit them or get them harmed, but the same thing is true about a lot of the jobs that people do to earn a living. So let’s focus more on solving the deeper problem of economic desperation and less on paternalistically policing what people do to survive.

Highly concerned. Such compensation would ensure that many people end up suffering and even dying simply because their desperation prevented them from properly considering the risks and making a competent, informed decision about whether to participate. This is an unethical way to make medical progress.