Remember when the CDC issued that guidance that asymptomatic people shouldn't be tested, even if they've had close contact with confirmed cases? And remember when everyone took that as evidence of Trump fucking with the CDC?
False CDC guidance saying that people without COVID-19 symptoms should not be tested was written by Trump officials and skipped the CDC’s scientific review process.
They are literally playing politics with our lives.
People who are both assholes and idiots: It's okay if people die from the pandemic because there will be a big baby boom from the disaster that will make up for it!
Reality: A dramatic, worldwide increase in stillbirths, ranging from 50% to 4x previous levels, due to lack of prenatal care (and probably stress too). And those numbers are probably undercounts too. There are not baby booms after long, sustained disasters.
Wow, that's something I hadn't really thought of before. That's a huge increase....
If the deaths are going to happen anyway - and they shouldn't, because so much of this was preventable, but here we are - why is a net drop in population inherently a bad thing? I feel like for most of my life, Very Smart People have been talking about how human population growth is unsustainable, and that one of the reasons we should want to raise the global standard of living, educate and empower women, etc. is that it tends to reduce birthrates. (Problematic in that people in rich countries consume disproportionately more resources than people in poverty, but then again developed nations tend to have negative population growth via births (relying on immigration for actual growth); so I guess the idea is that eventually you'd naturally have fewer people overall and thus more to go around, if we haven't completely fucked ourselves in the meantime.)
The issue is twofold.
First, a decrease in population growth is a good thing. If, over many generations women choose to have fewer children and populations fall that is a great boon to the environment. Perhaps over 100 years, populations could fall 20-30% with few economic impacts and everyone benefitting.
However, this non disruptive impact with uniformly positive effects is something that only happens with a slow decrease caused by women choosing to have fewer kids. This is something that is happening now, it just didn't happen effectively because we did such a terrible job of sharing resources with nations like India, Indonesia and many African nations. So, populations exploded as women did not feel the economic,legal and academic benefits of technological advancement. If you just slaughter people randomly, you dont get this effect. Women will be terrified for their children's futures, lose their rights, and lose their educations and populations will rise.
In addition, population control alone would have been enough to help us if we'd implemented it in say, 1920. Today, the sheer number of people qho are alive mean that we either need dilligent and careful sharing, with resource use minimization or massive technological advancement to support everyone at a happy and comfortable level. If everyone is terrified of dying they won't be doing research and sharing with each other.
Remember when the CDC issued that guidance that asymptomatic people shouldn't be tested, even if they've had close contact with confirmed cases? And remember when everyone took that as evidence of Trump fucking with the CDC?
False CDC guidance saying that people without COVID-19 symptoms should not be tested was written by Trump officials and skipped the CDC’s scientific review process.
They are literally playing politics with our lives.
Emails Detail Effort to Silence C.D.C. and Question Its Science
Emails from a former top Trump health official and his science adviser show how the two refused to accept Centers for Disease Control and Prevention science and sought to silence the agency.
WASHINGTON — On June 30, as the coronavirus was cresting toward its summer peak, Dr. Paul Alexander, a new science adviser at the Department of Health and Human Services, composed a scathing two-page critique of an interview given by a revered scientist at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Dr. Anne Schuchat, a 32-year veteran of the C.D.C. and its principal deputy director, had appealed to Americans to wear masks and warned, “We have way too much virus across the country.” But Dr. Alexander, a part-time assistant professor of health research methods, appeared sure he understood the coronavirus better.
“Her aim is to embarrass the president,” he wrote, commenting on Dr. Schuchat’s appeal for face masks in an interview with the Journal of the American Medical Association.
“She is duplicitous,” he also wrote in an email to his boss, Michael R. Caputo, the Health and Human Services Department’s top spokesman who went on medical leave this week. He asked Mr. Caputo to “remind” Dr. Schuchat that during the H1N1 swine flu outbreak in 2009, thousands of Americans had died “under her work.”
For instance, after Mr. Caputo forwarded the critique of Dr. Schuchat to Dr. Redfield, C.D.C. officials became concerned when a member of the health department’s White House liaison office — Catherine Granito — called the agency to ask questions about Dr. Schuchat’s biography, leaving the impression that some in Washington could have been searching for ways to fire her.
In another instance, Mr. Caputo wrote to C.D.C. communications officials on July 15 to demand they turn over the name of the press officer who approved a series of interviews between NPR and a longtime C.D.C. epidemiologist, after the department in Washington had moved to take ownership of the agency’s pandemic data collection.
Far from apologetic, Dr. Alexander told The Globe and Mail of Toronto this week that the C.D.C. had written “pseudoscientific reports” and that he was better suited to examine data than agency scientists.
“None of those people have my skills,” Dr. Alexander said. “I make the judgment whether this is crap.”
The judgments he rendered — and the punishments that Mr. Caputo appeared intent to mete out — had a demoralizing effect on the agency.
People who are both assholes and idiots: It's okay if people die from the pandemic because there will be a big baby boom from the disaster that will make up for it!
Reality: A dramatic, worldwide increase in stillbirths, ranging from 50% to 4x previous levels, due to lack of prenatal care (and probably stress too). And those numbers are probably undercounts too. There are not baby booms after long, sustained disasters.
Wow, that's something I hadn't really thought of before. That's a huge increase....
If the deaths are going to happen anyway - and they shouldn't, because so much of this was preventable, but here we are - why is a net drop in population inherently a bad thing? I feel like for most of my life, Very Smart People have been talking about how human population growth is unsustainable, and that one of the reasons we should want to raise the global standard of living, educate and empower women, etc. is that it tends to reduce birthrates. (Problematic in that people in rich countries consume disproportionately more resources than people in poverty, but then again developed nations tend to have negative population growth via births (relying on immigration for actual growth); so I guess the idea is that eventually you'd naturally have fewer people overall and thus more to go around, if we haven't completely fucked ourselves in the meantime.)
The issue is twofold.
First, a decrease in population growth is a good thing. If, over many generations women choose to have fewer children and populations fall that is a great boon to the environment. Perhaps over 100 years, populations could fall 20-30% with few economic impacts and everyone benefitting.
However, this non disruptive impact with uniformly positive effects is something that only happens with a slow decrease caused by women choosing to have fewer kids. This is something that is happening now, it just didn't happen effectively because we did such a terrible job of sharing resources with nations like India, Indonesia and many African nations. So, populations exploded as women did not feel the economic,legal and academic benefits of technological advancement. If you just slaughter people randomly, you dont get this effect. Women will be terrified for their children's futures, lose their rights, and lose their educations and populations will rise.
In addition, population control alone would have been enough to help us if we'd implemented it in say, 1920. Today, the sheer number of people qho are alive mean that we either need dilligent and careful sharing, with resource use minimization or massive technological advancement to support everyone at a happy and comfortable level. If everyone is terrified of dying they won't be doing research and sharing with each other.
The post I'm quoting is about how this apparently doesn't happen in the wake of a long-term disaster, even though you'd think it would, because of the previously mentioned stillbirths.
What typically happens when you raise the standard of living for a given group of people is you get a population explosion because the first generation out of poverty is still in "have lots of kids" mode. After that it settles and starts to decline.
Also, for the record, I'm not advocating any kind of active population control (other than empowering women, making birth control available, and letting people choose). It's one of those things that sounds good in abstract, but rapidly becomes horrific as soon as you start thinking about implementation.
+2
Options
KetarCome on upstairswe're having a partyRegistered Userregular
Remember when the CDC issued that guidance that asymptomatic people shouldn't be tested, even if they've had close contact with confirmed cases? And remember when everyone took that as evidence of Trump fucking with the CDC?
False CDC guidance saying that people without COVID-19 symptoms should not be tested was written by Trump officials and skipped the CDC’s scientific review process.
They are literally playing politics with our lives.
Renato Mariotti is a reporter for Politico.
Renato Mariotti is an attorney and former federal prosecutor who does legal analysis and commentary for various outlets, not a reporter. Probably to help boost his profile after an unsuccessful run at Illinois Attorney General in 2018.
He's also an old friend from college and a generally awesome guy with good views, and worth a follow if you're interested in frequent legal analysis from an experienced attorney.
+12
Options
ElldrenIs a woman dammitceterum censeoRegistered Userregular
Remember when the CDC issued that guidance that asymptomatic people shouldn't be tested, even if they've had close contact with confirmed cases? And remember when everyone took that as evidence of Trump fucking with the CDC?
False CDC guidance saying that people without COVID-19 symptoms should not be tested was written by Trump officials and skipped the CDC’s scientific review process.
They are literally playing politics with our lives.
This is not news. There are no new reported side-effects other than the side effects which have been determined to be not related to the vaccine by an indendant review board. This is why they should never have released their trial strategy, as it just creates pointless infighting between various statistical methodologies which the public has no way to understand.
This is not news. There are no new reported side-effects other than the side effects which have been determined to be not related to the vaccine by an indendant review board. This is why they should never have released their trial strategy, as it just creates pointless infighting between various statistical methodologies which the public has no way to understand.
... and goes against the narrative you desperately want to believe and have ceaselessly promoted here.
The review board saying "continue" does not mean they determined that side effect was definitely not caused by the vaccine and so any future instances can be discounted. That sounds super like a thing you should not be spreading as a fact
The review board saying "continue" does not mean they determined that side effect was definitely not caused by the vaccine and so any future instances can be discounted. That sounds super like a thing you should not be spreading as a fact
It’s not a future incidence. It’s a Past incidence which had already happened at the time of the one which caused the reported pause. The review board was aware of it at the time, and the article in the New York Times discusses how it was a preexisting but undiagnosed multiple sclerosis case.
The twitter report is massively wrong, and badly describes the article. These independent safety boards are highly conservative and highly competent. This is bickering between statisticians. If the vaccine is dangerous it will not be approved.
There's nothing we really need to do with this information at this point except follow the results of the trial. The protocol hasn't even been released yet.
Anyway, here's the NCT site if you guys are interested.
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
+6
Options
TetraNitroCubaneThe DjinneratorAt the bottom of a bottleRegistered Userregular
OH CHRIST—Trump HHS just did full “power grab” takeover of all drug/vaccines. Via “stunning declaration” of authority, HHS Secretary Azar barred FDA from signing any new rules—power now “is reserved to the Secretary.” Trump now controls all of it.
Eric Feigl-Ding is an Epidemiologist & Health Economist who works in health policy.
In a stunning declaration of authority, Alex M. Azar II, the secretary of health and human services, this week barred the nation’s health agencies, including the Food and Drug Administration, from signing any new rules regarding the nation’s foods, medicines, medical devices and other products, including vaccines.
Going forward, Mr. Azar wrote in a Sept. 15 memorandum obtained by The New York Times, such power “is reserved to the Secretary.” The bulletin was sent to heads of operating and staff divisions within H.H.S.
Dr. Peter Lurie, president of the Center for Science in the Public Interest and a former associate commissioner of the F.D.A., called the new policy “a power grab.”
Many rules issued by federal health agencies are signed by lawyers or by the heads of agencies, including the F.D.A., under the umbrella of H.H.S. The new memo requires the secretary to sign them, which Dr. Lurie said could lead to delays in the regulatory process.
“It will introduce an element of inefficiency within government operations that is wholly unnecessary and likely to gum things up,” he said.
+11
Options
OrcaAlso known as EspressosaurusWrexRegistered Userregular
Can't wait for an ineffective at best vaccine to be rolled out, we reopen, and everybody catches covid.
This screams “we’re gonna rush a vaccine to market for Trump’s re-election, no matter the side effects or if it even actually works past Election Day.”
Wait until we get word from the Europeans on a vaccine now, I fully expect Azar would sign off on saline if he thought it’d get Trump re-elected.
I can has cheezburger, yes?
+15
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
This screams “we’re gonna rush a vaccine to market for Trump’s re-election, no matter the side effects or if it even actually works past Election Day.”
Wait until we get word from the Europeans on a vaccine now, I fully expect Azar would sign off on saline if he thought it’d get Trump re-elected.
To be clear, this is bad, but what it means is that every new rule released by the FDA etc has to be directly signed off on by the Secretary of HHS. This doesn't mean he makes the rules. It means he approves all new ones whereas before it was routine to have any number of different people do this.
This alone does not give him the power to approve a vaccine, or to issue an EUA. He could probably stop a vaccine being issued if it was approved already? It MIGHT let him issue an untested vaccine to the military? Because I think he has more control over their health directly, and now he can't be stopped from doing that.
However, it doesn't give Trump the power to say approve the Moderna vaccine and issue it to the general public untested. And, to be additionally clear, Moderna and others wouldn't let them do that with their vaccine anyway because the US is a fraction of the world market and doing so would be a disaster. If Moderna thinks the vaccine works, they will be happy to wait a month and sell it to everyone once it's proven to do so. If they think it DOESNT work they are a vaccine company. They know they can't make the doses fast enough to make it worth their while before people find out its useless if it doesn't work.
So, it's bad, but in the usual weird Trump based power grab that is vaguely pointless way. Trump could already have (for example) just bought the Russian vaccine and made it available if he didn't give a shit about anyone or anything in the US. Because he would be the one responsible for stopping himself from doing that when the FDA told him to.
Is that every approval by the FDA? Is all drug and device research everywhere going to come to a crashing halt?
Paladin on
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
Is that every approval by the FDA? Is all drug and device research everywhere going to come to a crashing halt?
My read of it is that if it looks like it might have consequences for Trump, they're not allowed to say or do it.
Maybe that's saying the quiet part loud, but that's the new normal.
Is that every approval by the FDA? Is all drug and device research everywhere going to come to a crashing halt?
It seems so? I mean, I guess he could sign all the approvals anyway? But, the outcome that he needs to sign everything, and doesn't sign anything so no drugs are approved for anything seems the more likely outcome?
"That is cool" - Abraham Lincoln
0
Options
ElldrenIs a woman dammitceterum censeoRegistered Userregular
This is the secretary effectively trying to micromanage the entire US federal health regulatory infrastructure by himself.
It is bound to crash and fail horribly because he just gave himself several years of work to handle personally over the next 4 months
fuck gendered marketing
+8
Options
ElldrenIs a woman dammitceterum censeoRegistered Userregular
Is that every approval by the FDA? Is all drug and device research everywhere going to come to a crashing halt?
My read of it is that if it looks like it might have consequences for Trump, they're not allowed to say or do it.
Maybe that's saying the quiet part loud, but that's the new normal.
This is probably the intention but the actual action is that the day-to-day work of dozens of high level federal offices is now the personal responsibility of the HHS secretary
Is that every approval by the FDA? Is all drug and device research everywhere going to come to a crashing halt?
My read of it is that if it looks like it might have consequences for Trump, they're not allowed to say or do it.
Maybe that's saying the quiet part loud, but that's the new normal.
This is probably the intention but the actual action is that the day-to-day work of dozens of high level federal offices is now the personal responsibility of the HHS secretary
This seems increadibly ripe for bothering by the book.
Bury the asshat in paperwork (there's probably enough to do it literally). Stuff his office with papers until he can't open the door.
Is that every approval by the FDA? Is all drug and device research everywhere going to come to a crashing halt?
My read of it is that if it looks like it might have consequences for Trump, they're not allowed to say or do it.
Maybe that's saying the quiet part loud, but that's the new normal.
This is probably the intention but the actual action is that the day-to-day work of dozens of high level federal offices is now the personal responsibility of the HHS secretary
This seems increadibly ripe for bothering by the book.
Bury the asshat in paperwork (there's probably enough to do it literally). Stuff his office with papers until he can't open the door.
"We need your sign-off on these 100 new types of replacement hip."
+9
Options
TetraNitroCubaneThe DjinneratorAt the bottom of a bottleRegistered Userregular
Is that every approval by the FDA? Is all drug and device research everywhere going to come to a crashing halt?
My read of it is that if it looks like it might have consequences for Trump, they're not allowed to say or do it.
Maybe that's saying the quiet part loud, but that's the new normal.
This is probably the intention but the actual action is that the day-to-day work of dozens of high level federal offices is now the personal responsibility of the HHS secretary
This seems increadibly ripe for bothering by the book.
Bury the asshat in paperwork (there's probably enough to do it literally). Stuff his office with papers until he can't open the door.
"We need your sign-off on these 100 new types of replacement hip."
This will backfire miserably, but not on them. They just won't do anything.
"See? The FDA is broken! We should abolish it, and let the market decide!"
+27
Options
AthenorBattle Hardened OptimistThe Skies of HiigaraRegistered Userregular
Regarding this morning's CDC announcements (see the updates thread):
I felt really disheartened this morning when I saw a WaPo headline about the CDC calling COVBID airborne and my immediate thought was "like I can trust the CDC..."
Is that every approval by the FDA? Is all drug and device research everywhere going to come to a crashing halt?
My read of it is that if it looks like it might have consequences for Trump, they're not allowed to say or do it.
Maybe that's saying the quiet part loud, but that's the new normal.
This is probably the intention but the actual action is that the day-to-day work of dozens of high level federal offices is now the personal responsibility of the HHS secretary
This seems increadibly ripe for bothering by the book.
Bury the asshat in paperwork (there's probably enough to do it literally). Stuff his office with papers until he can't open the door.
https://xkcd.com/1260/ it wouldn't take too many studies to reach the LD50 of study papers
Is that every approval by the FDA? Is all drug and device research everywhere going to come to a crashing halt?
My read of it is that if it looks like it might have consequences for Trump, they're not allowed to say or do it.
Maybe that's saying the quiet part loud, but that's the new normal.
This is probably the intention but the actual action is that the day-to-day work of dozens of high level federal offices is now the personal responsibility of the HHS secretary
This seems increadibly ripe for bothering by the book.
Bury the asshat in paperwork (there's probably enough to do it literally). Stuff his office with papers until he can't open the door.
"We need your sign-off on these 100 new types of replacement hip."
This will backfire miserably, but not on them. They just won't do anything.
"See? The FDA is broken! We should abolish it, and let the market decide!"
Probably. But in the interim, they will have every pharma company (and other companies that makes stuff that requires FDA approval) screaming at them 24/7.
This is the secretary effectively trying to micromanage the entire US federal health regulatory infrastructure by himself.
It is bound to crash and fail horribly because he just gave himself several years of work to handle personally over the next 4 months
It’s only extra work if he actually cares about doing it
Or if he doesn’t just delegate it to dozens of his own politically-aligned subordinates (not quite sure what to call folks that Azar can hire, or if he can’t hire, interns/volunteers/friends of Trump), who surface the final memo for him to stamp
Is that every approval by the FDA? Is all drug and device research everywhere going to come to a crashing halt?
My read of it is that if it looks like it might have consequences for Trump, they're not allowed to say or do it.
Maybe that's saying the quiet part loud, but that's the new normal.
This is probably the intention but the actual action is that the day-to-day work of dozens of high level federal offices is now the personal responsibility of the HHS secretary
This seems increadibly ripe for bothering by the book.
Bury the asshat in paperwork (there's probably enough to do it literally). Stuff his office with papers until he can't open the door.
"We need your sign-off on these 100 new types of replacement hip."
This will backfire miserably, but not on them. They just won't do anything.
"See? The FDA is broken! We should abolish it, and let the market decide!"
Probably. But in the interim, they will have every pharma company (and other companies that makes stuff that requires FDA approval) screaming at them 24/7.
Hmm, looks like they just created a new channel for graft (like these pharmaceutical companies wouldn’t be above just paying Azar directly to approve their shit)
Is that every approval by the FDA? Is all drug and device research everywhere going to come to a crashing halt?
My read of it is that if it looks like it might have consequences for Trump, they're not allowed to say or do it.
Maybe that's saying the quiet part loud, but that's the new normal.
This is probably the intention but the actual action is that the day-to-day work of dozens of high level federal offices is now the personal responsibility of the HHS secretary
This seems increadibly ripe for bothering by the book.
Bury the asshat in paperwork (there's probably enough to do it literally). Stuff his office with papers until he can't open the door.
"We need your sign-off on these 100 new types of replacement hip."
This will backfire miserably, but not on them. They just won't do anything.
"See? The FDA is broken! We should abolish it, and let the market decide!"
Probably. But in the interim, they will have every pharma company (and other companies that makes stuff that requires FDA approval) screaming at them 24/7.
Hmm, looks like they just created a new channel for graft (like these pharmaceutical companies wouldn’t be above just paying Azar directly to approve their shit)
My wife (who works regularly with the FDA) told me this morning that new drug and device approval is not rule making, and is instead conducted under existing rules, but that any specific new exemptions (or new rules for trials etc) would be considered rule making.
Effectively meaning that what this seems to do is create a situation where (for example) if the review committee at the FDA had seen a truly massive slam dunk of a signal and desperately wanted to issue an emergency guideline which was not in line with current standard rules to start vaccinating healthcare workers instantly to save lives, they would be unable to do so until Azar had come back from a round of golf, reviewed a few hubdred thousand other documents and then reformatted the document to make it seem like Trump had personally discovered the vaccine.
So a ton of articles came out today about the CDC updating it’s guidance this morning based on COVID being airborne
Except that guidance has now been taken back down with a note that a draft had been posted in error- per the CDC, we’re still good just staying 6’ apart and washing our hands frequently
Nice
Captain Inertia on
+1
Options
MayabirdPecking at the keyboardRegistered Userregular
Vermont has lifted restrictions on bars, restaurants, and hotels. We've been doing well, but that's not why they want to open everything up. See, it's September, almost October, which means leaf-peeping season.
Looking forward to things exploding here!
Oh don't worry, I'm sure everyone traveling from out of state areas where the virus is rampant will properly follow unenforced state rules and self quarantine before visiting (ahahahaha yeah right.) Honestly if anything it's just made it easier to identify the out of staters, because they almost consistently never wear masks.
Are the rural Vermonters wearing masks? Rural people in New Hampshire absolutely aren't. Cities and even smaller towns with mask mandates are doing it well, but outside those places? People seem to think the state motto is "Live free AND die."
Posts
And today they have dropped that guidance
CNBC reporter
The issue is twofold.
First, a decrease in population growth is a good thing. If, over many generations women choose to have fewer children and populations fall that is a great boon to the environment. Perhaps over 100 years, populations could fall 20-30% with few economic impacts and everyone benefitting.
However, this non disruptive impact with uniformly positive effects is something that only happens with a slow decrease caused by women choosing to have fewer kids. This is something that is happening now, it just didn't happen effectively because we did such a terrible job of sharing resources with nations like India, Indonesia and many African nations. So, populations exploded as women did not feel the economic,legal and academic benefits of technological advancement. If you just slaughter people randomly, you dont get this effect. Women will be terrified for their children's futures, lose their rights, and lose their educations and populations will rise.
In addition, population control alone would have been enough to help us if we'd implemented it in say, 1920. Today, the sheer number of people qho are alive mean that we either need dilligent and careful sharing, with resource use minimization or massive technological advancement to support everyone at a happy and comfortable level. If everyone is terrified of dying they won't be doing research and sharing with each other.
I'm sure the trump administration will soon redefine close contact to mean "Licked at least 35 times"
The post I'm quoting is about how this apparently doesn't happen in the wake of a long-term disaster, even though you'd think it would, because of the previously mentioned stillbirths.
What typically happens when you raise the standard of living for a given group of people is you get a population explosion because the first generation out of poverty is still in "have lots of kids" mode. After that it settles and starts to decline.
Also, for the record, I'm not advocating any kind of active population control (other than empowering women, making birth control available, and letting people choose). It's one of those things that sounds good in abstract, but rapidly becomes horrific as soon as you start thinking about implementation.
Renato Mariotti is an attorney and former federal prosecutor who does legal analysis and commentary for various outlets, not a reporter. Probably to help boost his profile after an unsuccessful run at Illinois Attorney General in 2018.
He's also an old friend from college and a generally awesome guy with good views, and worth a follow if you're interested in frequent legal analysis from an experienced attorney.
This bullshit is directly affecting my work
It used to be if I told a patient we were doing something in accordance to CDC guidelines it would be reassuring.
Now, at best I get eyerolls, and at worst it reduces the levels of patient compliance.
Fuck this admin so much.
Today in the nyt they talk about a potential second person with the same side effect.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/19/health/astrazeneca-vaccine-safety-blueprints.html
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube
This is not news. There are no new reported side-effects other than the side effects which have been determined to be not related to the vaccine by an indendant review board. This is why they should never have released their trial strategy, as it just creates pointless infighting between various statistical methodologies which the public has no way to understand.
... and goes against the narrative you desperately want to believe and have ceaselessly promoted here.
3DS Friend Code: 3110-5393-4113
Steam profile
It’s not a future incidence. It’s a Past incidence which had already happened at the time of the one which caused the reported pause. The review board was aware of it at the time, and the article in the New York Times discusses how it was a preexisting but undiagnosed multiple sclerosis case.
The twitter report is massively wrong, and badly describes the article. These independent safety boards are highly conservative and highly competent. This is bickering between statisticians. If the vaccine is dangerous it will not be approved.
Anyway, here's the NCT site if you guys are interested.
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
Eric Feigl-Ding is an Epidemiologist & Health Economist who works in health policy.
The article he's referencing is here
The best of all possible outcomes.
and fuck up the health of even more, forever.
all so he can "win".
Wait until we get word from the Europeans on a vaccine now, I fully expect Azar would sign off on saline if he thought it’d get Trump re-elected.
I can has cheezburger, yes?
Saline if we're lucky.
Well, you've already done all of that without the vaccine
This alone does not give him the power to approve a vaccine, or to issue an EUA. He could probably stop a vaccine being issued if it was approved already? It MIGHT let him issue an untested vaccine to the military? Because I think he has more control over their health directly, and now he can't be stopped from doing that.
However, it doesn't give Trump the power to say approve the Moderna vaccine and issue it to the general public untested. And, to be additionally clear, Moderna and others wouldn't let them do that with their vaccine anyway because the US is a fraction of the world market and doing so would be a disaster. If Moderna thinks the vaccine works, they will be happy to wait a month and sell it to everyone once it's proven to do so. If they think it DOESNT work they are a vaccine company. They know they can't make the doses fast enough to make it worth their while before people find out its useless if it doesn't work.
So, it's bad, but in the usual weird Trump based power grab that is vaguely pointless way. Trump could already have (for example) just bought the Russian vaccine and made it available if he didn't give a shit about anyone or anything in the US. Because he would be the one responsible for stopping himself from doing that when the FDA told him to.
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
My read of it is that if it looks like it might have consequences for Trump, they're not allowed to say or do it.
Maybe that's saying the quiet part loud, but that's the new normal.
It seems so? I mean, I guess he could sign all the approvals anyway? But, the outcome that he needs to sign everything, and doesn't sign anything so no drugs are approved for anything seems the more likely outcome?
It is bound to crash and fail horribly because he just gave himself several years of work to handle personally over the next 4 months
This is probably the intention but the actual action is that the day-to-day work of dozens of high level federal offices is now the personal responsibility of the HHS secretary
This seems increadibly ripe for bothering by the book.
Bury the asshat in paperwork (there's probably enough to do it literally). Stuff his office with papers until he can't open the door.
"We need your sign-off on these 100 new types of replacement hip."
This will backfire miserably, but not on them. They just won't do anything.
"See? The FDA is broken! We should abolish it, and let the market decide!"
I felt really disheartened this morning when I saw a WaPo headline about the CDC calling COVBID airborne and my immediate thought was "like I can trust the CDC..."
https://xkcd.com/1260/ it wouldn't take too many studies to reach the LD50 of study papers
Probably. But in the interim, they will have every pharma company (and other companies that makes stuff that requires FDA approval) screaming at them 24/7.
It’s only extra work if he actually cares about doing it
Or if he doesn’t just delegate it to dozens of his own politically-aligned subordinates (not quite sure what to call folks that Azar can hire, or if he can’t hire, interns/volunteers/friends of Trump), who surface the final memo for him to stamp
Hmm, looks like they just created a new channel for graft (like these pharmaceutical companies wouldn’t be above just paying Azar directly to approve their shit)
My wife (who works regularly with the FDA) told me this morning that new drug and device approval is not rule making, and is instead conducted under existing rules, but that any specific new exemptions (or new rules for trials etc) would be considered rule making.
Effectively meaning that what this seems to do is create a situation where (for example) if the review committee at the FDA had seen a truly massive slam dunk of a signal and desperately wanted to issue an emergency guideline which was not in line with current standard rules to start vaccinating healthcare workers instantly to save lives, they would be unable to do so until Azar had come back from a round of golf, reviewed a few hubdred thousand other documents and then reformatted the document to make it seem like Trump had personally discovered the vaccine.
Except that guidance has now been taken back down with a note that a draft had been posted in error- per the CDC, we’re still good just staying 6’ apart and washing our hands frequently
Nice
Are the rural Vermonters wearing masks? Rural people in New Hampshire absolutely aren't. Cities and even smaller towns with mask mandates are doing it well, but outside those places? People seem to think the state motto is "Live free AND die."