Cont: The all-new "US Politics and coronavirus" thread pt. 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
And if a healthy volunteer in the placebo arm gets Covid-19 and ends up with a life-long, chronic lung condition, who pays for their life-long medical costs?

The answer in most countries likely to do such trials is obvious, and ethical.

In the US? Not so much. It can be a very unpleasant surprise to many an otherwise willing volunteer to carefully read the fine print of what medical costs that volunteer will have to pay in the event they develop a nasty, chronic condition.

Oh, and we getting a better idea of how common Covid-19 organ damage is, even in those who are asymptomatic (it’s scary).
 
What will Trump say when the number of Covid-19 deaths exceeds 200,000 (assuming that’s before November 3)?

That the number is vastly overinflated and that if half the people had been tested the number would be under 100,000. He'll claim that there are thousands of people who have been shot, run over or killed by Antifa who tested positive for Coronavirus and have been wrongly counted.

He'll also claim that he saved millions of Americans because without his perfect action millions or tens of millions would have died.

And about 40-45% of the electorate will believe him :mad:
 
Long, but illuminating, article about early response to the pandemic. It's about a group of people, including government officials and others, communicating about the coronavirus during the period of January through March.


https://abcnews.go.com/Health/coron...-red-dawn-team-save-america/story?id=72000727


In some ways, I doubt that people here will be surprised or informed by it. I think most of us communicating here already know most of it. The one sentence summary is that there were people trying to spread the alarm, but it wasn't reaching the top and the response was uncoordinated. While I wish other people would understand that, I think most people here probably have been saying it for a while. Nevertheless, I found it interesting to see more directly into the thoughts of the informed people from that period in time.
 
And if a healthy volunteer in the placebo arm gets Covid-19 and ends up with a life-long, chronic lung condition, who pays for their life-long medical costs?

The answer in most countries likely to do such trials is obvious, and ethical.

In the US? Not so much. It can be a very unpleasant surprise to many an otherwise willing volunteer to carefully read the fine print of what medical costs that volunteer will have to pay in the event they develop a nasty, chronic condition.
....

I don't know a lot about these things, but I don't think there would be a need for placebos in challenge testing. In standard testing we don't know which subjects are actually getting exposed to the virus as they go about their ordinary business, so it's a matter of playing the odds. But here the premise is that someone who has actually been vaccinated would be deliberately exposed to the virus to see if they get sick. We already know that people who don't get vaccinated and are exposed to the virus do get sick. The care issue could be resolved by guaranteeing participants long-term free care, either through that specific program or by paid health insurance comparable, say, to a federal employee.

As the writer and others note, if the risks of challenge testing ultimately save tens of thousands of lives, it's not an easy call.
 
Last edited:
Another republican politician has come down with Covid-19

From: Raw Story
Arkansas State Sen. Jason Rapert (R) has a known history of downplaying the coronavirus, even pushing narratives on social media that describe it as a “hoax.” Now, he’s contracted the virus...

Mmmm... yummy Schadenfreud.
 
I don't know a lot about these things, but I don't think there would be a need for placebos in challenge testing. In standard testing we don't know which subjects are actually getting exposed to the virus, so it's a matter of playing the odds. But here the premise is that someone who has actually been vaccinated would be deliberately exposed to the virus to see if they get sick. We already know that people who don't get vaccinated and are exposed to the virus do get sick. The care issue could be resolved by guaranteeing participants long-term free care, either through that specific program or by paid health insurance comparable, say, to a federal employee.

As the writer and others note, if the risks of challenge testing ultimately save tens of thousands of lives, it's not an easy call.
Of course the details matter a great deal.

And there may very well be challenge trials with no placebo arm.

From memory, I've read PRs/discussion pieces about only a few of the proposed challenge trials, all at high level (among other things, no numbers). And in at least one of them, the design explicitly included a placebo arm (I'll see if I can dig up a link).

In all trials there is a real risk of death or serious injury, including a life-long chronic condition. And this real risk will be made very clear to those considering volunteering (not sure how true that may be in China, say, or North Korea). Ditto honesty over just how great this risk is, including "bottom line, we really don't know". So yes, there may be a real risk of death (but my estate will/should be amply compensated). And I may never realize my ambition to run a marathon or climb K2. But should I get a serious chronic condition, I'd sure like to be reassured that all my hospitalizations, doctors' bills, prescriptions, etc will be paid for. In full.
 

Wow. Just wow. I'd like to say it is unbelievable, but it really isn't anymore. I sadly think this quack will gain quite a bit of traction simply because of how far the Right has gone into the CT rabbit hole. Serious question: How is this woman permitted to operate as a medical doctor?
 

Ethical imperative my ass. :rolleyes: Notice the op ed author isn't even a medical reporter let alone someone with expertise in the subject.

In the story he cites:
A recent article in The Journal of Infectious Diseases suggests a “human challenge trial” of that sort. “Challenging volunteers with this live virus risks inducing severe disease and possibly even death,” the authors acknowledge. However, hastening deployment of a vaccine could significantly reduce death and disease, they argue––and the risk to volunteers could be acceptable if the volunteers are young and healthy, and get excellent care.
If we have such excellent care, why are so many people dying?

There are plenty of test markets with ongoing COVID transmission. You don't need to put additional people at risk.

There are young healthy persons who are suffering severe consequences from this virus. You have no idea if those volunteers really understand the risk or are simply going by what they've heard about being low risk.

And, if everyone put a damn mask on the immediate need for this vaccine could be lessened. The point being, work on mask wearing and you don't need to find volunteers to risk their lives.

Notice also that article is 3 months old and they cite a medical journal op ed that is 4 months old.
 
Last edited:
I don't know a lot about these things, but I don't think there would be a need for placebos in challenge testing. In standard testing we don't know which subjects are actually getting exposed to the virus as they go about their ordinary business, so it's a matter of playing the odds. But here the premise is that someone who has actually been vaccinated would be deliberately exposed to the virus to see if they get sick. We already know that people who don't get vaccinated and are exposed to the virus do get sick. The care issue could be resolved by guaranteeing participants long-term free care, either through that specific program or by paid health insurance comparable, say, to a federal employee.

As the writer and others note, if the risks of challenge testing ultimately save tens of thousands of lives, it's not an easy call.
First off, not everyone gets sick so not only do you need a control group, you would be exposing unvaccinated people to the virus.

Second who's going to pay for that long term disability? That might involve an income plus medical care.

Third, there is currently a safe alternative to the vaccine, that is masks and social distancing.

We need the vaccine because you can't wear masks and do social distancing for years.

Fourth, there is an alternative to challenging vaccine recipients and that is to give it to thousands of volunteers in a population with ongoing transmission.
 
Another republican politician has come down with Covid-19

From: Raw Story
Arkansas State Sen. Jason Rapert (R) has a known history of downplaying the coronavirus, even pushing narratives on social media that describe it as a “hoax.” Now, he’s contracted the virus...

Mmmm... yummy Schadenfreud.
Not only contracted it, he's in the hospital.
 
Herman Cain is still in the hospital after a month. [cnn.com]. He fell sick 10 or 11 days after attending the Trump rally in Tusla.

New York Magazine (not to be confused with The New Yorker) reports:
In late June, Trump staged an indoor rally in Tulsa. His staff removed stickers on seats intended to space out attendees. Announcing his presence, Cain wrote, “Masks will not be mandatory for the event, which will be attended by President Trump. PEOPLE ARE FED UP!” (A few days after the rally, Cain tested positive.) New York Magazine link

Herman Cain at Tulsa rally. (Today he's on oxygen.)
 

Attachments

  • Herman Cain at Tulsa.jpg
    Herman Cain at Tulsa.jpg
    124.9 KB · Views: 17
More from the New York Magazine article:
The supposed world leader is in fact a viral petri dish of uncontained infection. By June, after most of the world had beaten back the coronavirus pandemic, the U.S., with 4 percent of the world’s population, accounted for 25 percent of its cases. Florida alone was seeing more new infections a week than China, Japan, Korea, Vietnam, Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia, the Philippines, Australia, and the European Union combined. During its long period of decline, the Ottoman Empire was called “the sick man of Europe.” The United States is now the sick man of the world, pitied by the same countries that once envied its pandemic preparedness — and, as recently as the 2014 Ebola outbreak, relied on its expertise to organize the global response. Link

Odd that Ebola virus is mentioned. Here's what trump had to say about Ebola at the time:
Trump’s first tweet about Ebola came on July 31, 2014 — the day before a State Department flying ambulance brought two American health workers back to Emory University, home of the CDC, from Monrovia, where they had contracted the virus. “Ebola patient will be brought to the U.S. in a few days - now I know for sure that our leaders are incompetent. KEEP THEM OUT OF HERE!” Trump wrote.

In the days that followed, Trump said the US government “must immediately stop all flights from EBOLA infected countries or the plague will start and spread inside our ‘borders,’” and started attacking the CDC, whose leadership at the time was calling for calm and arguing that closing the borders in the manner Trump suggested would only make things harder to manage. In September and October, Trump turned his fire to President Obama, calling him “dumb,” saying his refusal to stop flights from Africa was “almost like saying F-you to U.S. public,” and claiming in an Instagram video that “he should be ashamed.”

But after the midterms came and went on November 4 — elections in which Republicans gained nine Senate seats and 13 House seats — Trump lost interest in the issue. He only posted two tweets about Ebola after the midterms, with his last one coming on November 10. Trump’s hysteria about Ebola was overblown. The virus did not spread in the United States. There were only two deaths from the disease in the country, and both of them were people who contracted it in Africa. It’s hard to argue that the Obama administration’s response was anything but competent and effective. Link to story on VOX website

"It’s hard to argue that the Obama administration’s response was anything but competent and effective," unless you're donald trump.
 
Trump pimps chloroquine again.

Trump: I happen to believe in hydroxychloroquine

President Donald Trump discusses his belief in the drug hydroxychloroquine to treat the coronavirus and says the reason people don't like it is because he recommends it.
He just says anything that echoes around that empty cranium of his. Also, he's continued to champion this drug because he is incapable of admitting he's wrong about anything.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom