|
Cacafuego posted:Do you think the drug companies, or your employer in particular, would try to gain marketing approval by slipping known adverse drug reactions past the regulatory agencies? I don’t think that would happen, but if you do why would you take any drug, ever? Do you think that they would prepare a marketing approval application to the FDA that didn’t include something that they informed the EMA about? The vaccine for this is literally worth 10s to hundreds of billions of dollars to the company that gets there first and is a complete loss of everything spent to everyone else. Your insistence that people trust the pharmaceutical companies and their long history of putting human health over profit* isn't changing minds here. *ha And my employer is one of those psychos forcing their employees into the grinder and letting us know just how disposable we(and our loved ones) actually are. gently caress no do I trust them either.
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2020 14:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 21:12 |
|
|
I just want to echo what caca said here. I'm a molecular biologist who actually works on pharmaceutical drug candidates and I can tell you from experience that A) getting FDA approval is tough as poo poo, and B) the FDA reviews drug companies filing process, production process, and clinical trial reports. It's not like the FDA tests the drugs themselves -- they rely on the accuracy of pharma company reporting. So I guess what I'm saying is if you're concerned about a harmful drug hitting the market, I'd worry more about the manufacturer falsifying data than the regulatory body. It's not like Trump knew anything about Chloroquine before it was presented to him BY the FDA to begin with, meaning it was already being reviewed. It's not like Teump brought it to the FDA's attention. Also, Trump is a shitstain. By the way, lots of goons here in pharma or related industries it seems. Cool.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2020 14:58
|
|
|
FoolyCharged posted:The vaccine for this is literally worth 10s to hundreds of billions of dollars to the company that gets there first and is a complete loss of everything spent to everyone else. Your insistence that people trust the pharmaceutical companies and their long history of putting human health over profit* isn't changing minds here. I essentially just posted as such, but yeah, I'd question the pharma company itself before the FDA. Is the FDA compromised or corrupt? Maybe? But I'm sure as poo poo pharma companies are. Look out for falsified information in their studies.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2020 15:01
|
|
|
central dogma posted:Is the FDA compromised or corrupt? Maybe? But I'm sure as poo poo pharma companies are. Look out for falsified information in their studies. Ok I trust the vaccine now
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2020 15:11
|
|
|
I'm a molicular orthoptist and really you don't have to worry about the vaccine, just be careful someone doesn't greenlight a product based on falsified data.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2020 15:13
|
|
|
Cacafuego posted:Understood. If you can’t understand it, look to your medical professionals to give you that info, but do not look to politicians. Nobody should be getting medical advice from politicians. Your local docs or even Fauci if you want a national source. I don’t listen to government sources for anything, but I trust his info. you mean like these medical professionals? https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...s-idUSKBN21O2VO
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2020 15:20
|
|
|
Cacafuego posted:Nope. USDA bad, FDA bad. I never said they were good or reliable, but the FDA isn’t making the vaccine. You're missing the point. Yes, the FDA isn't making the vaccine, but some people right now are not convinced that the FDA currently has the teeth to keep the actual producers honest. The same way the USDA doesn't make pork, but they still used to have inspectors at processing plants to make sure they were following safety regulations. This administration decided that was too onerous, and it was sufficient to just take the meat processors at their word they were still following the rules. Most of them probably are, but some of them may now be cutting corners. Who knows! Why are you so convinced that a drug manufacturer won't cut corners or even outright falsify data if it means more money for them when any outside supervision is impotent?
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2020 15:30
|
|
|
unpacked robinhood posted:I'm a molicular orthoptist and really you don't have to worry about the vaccine, just be careful someone doesn't greenlight a product based on falsified data. Wow, there's that old Lowtax GBS humor. Right out of the old Jeff K. guidebook. I don't know if you've heard, but he's not exactly popular these days. Do you think this is the first time in history that *a lot* money has been at stake for a new drug. Did you know that hundreds of millions or billions of dollars are at stake for every potential blockbuster drug to go thru approval? I get it that you might be new to all of this, but I'm not. Edit: Like poo poo, you all are using the same exact arguments that anti-vaxxers use to a T. central dogma fucked around with this message at 15:43 on Jun 29, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2020 15:41
|
|
|
central dogma posted:Edit: Like poo poo, you all are using the same exact arguments that anti-vaxxers use to a T. Except the part where everyone here has no objections to a vaccine that has gone through approvals by pharmaceutical regulators who don't work for an obscenely corrupt administration that has made an open goal of undermining industry oversight? Company says it's safe? Who knows. Company says it's safe and FDA signs off on it? Eh, still who knows. Company says it's safe and EU/Japanese regulators sign off on it? Put it in my veins. AreWeDrunkYet fucked around with this message at 15:53 on Jun 29, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2020 15:48
|
|
|
central dogma posted:Wow, there's that old Lowtax GBS humor. Right out of the old Jeff K. guidebook. I don't know if you've heard, but he's not exactly popular these days. you're a very unlikable person. i hope this helps!
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2020 15:48
|
|
|
Shopping for these kn95 filters is an absolute breeze. You just type that in and bam you're presented with a multitude of buying options that all appear completely legitimate.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2020 16:00
|
|
|
central dogma posted:It's not like Trump knew anything about Chloroquine before it was presented to him BY the FDA to begin with, meaning it was already being reviewed. It's not like Teump brought it to the FDA's attention. A couple days before trump tweeted about chloroquine all my chud co-workers were hearing about it from right wing sources claiming it was a miracle cure. Trump heard about Chloroquine from Fox News who heard it from glenn beck and other right wing sources. He then tweeted that it was basically a miracle cure and would be the next biggest medical breakthrough in history. I highly doubt the FDA came to Trump first. I think his tweet forced the FDA's hand, since anyone objecting to his whims mysteriously gets fired or resigns. Then a week or so after that the FDA issued a EAU.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2020 16:31
|
|
|
AreWeDrunkYet posted:Except the part where everyone here has no objections to a vaccine that has gone through approvals by pharmaceutical regulators who don't work for an obscenely corrupt administration that has made an open goal of undermining industry oversight? I appreciate your honesty. I guess it comes down to risk and reward. What is the highest risk in taking a fast-tracked vaccine? That it might not be as effective as claimed. No new vaccine is going to kill you or give you cancer or autism. The technology used to manufacture these vaccines is already established. You subject yourself to it every year with the flu shot. The fact is, lots of people are dying from Covid-19 still. Tens of thousands of innocent people. The situation in the US is awful. What's going to happen is the FDA will fast track and approve a vaccine, a bunch of anti-vaxxers aren't going to take it, then a year or two later, the EMA will approve it. They're not in a hurry, you see, because the EU got their COVID under control. "Lol guess it was okay all along!" and in that year or two, a lot more people would have died that didn't have to. And all for what? Mozi posted:you're a very unlikable person. i hope this helps! Oof, ow, stop. I'm not trying to become a GBS superstar, so that's okay. I'm just trying to have an on-topic discussion with some other posters, whether we agree with each other or not.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2020 16:35
|
|
|
Dear Watson posted:A couple days before trump tweeted about chloroquine all my chud co-workers were hearing about it from right wing sources claiming it was a miracle cure. I believe you, but chloroquine was studied when SARS was a thing in the early 2000s. So maybe the FDA didn't sit in a room with Trump for a debriefing, I'll admit, but the pre-established research was already there. I stand that this wasn't something Trump just pulled out of his rear end.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2020 16:37
|
|
|
I was under the impression Trump knew about that drug since he is a shareholder in the major manufacturer of it? Not an American so it's kinda hard to keep track of your President's bullshit and lies
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2020 16:43
|
|
|
My dads uncle works for the FDA and he said the corona vaccine coming out next week CURES autism.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2020 16:48
|
|
|
stab posted:I was under the impression Trump knew about that drug since he is a shareholder in the major manufacturer of it? No clue on whether he has a stake in that drug or not. The EMA approved its use for emergency situations as well, and I doubt that was due to Trump's blustering.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2020 16:49
|
|
|
You sure it's not going to end up like dengue fever, where a vaccine that's mostly-ineffective actually makes it more lethal if you do catch it? To me, that seems somewhat plausible for something where an immune system overresponse is what causes a significant amount of the damage. We don't have a dengue fever vaccine for exactly that reason, but do you trust the company that happens to get to something marketable first to not have cut corners on checking for that?
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2020 16:53
|
|
|
central dogma posted:I appreciate your honesty. The main risks are the same as most novel vaccines, (a) it doesn't work and contributes to the spread of the disease if it's used as justification for riskier behavior or (b) it gives you the disease it's supposed to innoculate against.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2020 16:53
|
|
|
So how long do you think it'll be until we start hearing about health insurance companies denying claims based on people's Facebook posts about refusing to wear masks as evidence that they failed to attempt to avoid or mitigate injury? Failure to attempt to avoid or mitigate injury is a reason a health insurer can use to deny a claim.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2020 16:54
|
|
|
cross posting from the capitalism thread that my landlord wants my wife and i to sign waivers that he's not responsible if somone gets covid while he shows our house (which hes selling now, in the middle of a pandemic, after 13 years of scrupulous rent payments, because he feels like it) poor me
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2020 16:57
|
|
|
boar guy posted:cross posting from the capitalism thread that my landlord wants my wife and i to sign waivers that he's not responsible if somone gets covid while he shows our house (which hes selling now, in the middle of a pandemic, after 13 years of scrupulous rent payments, because he feels like it) gently caress that, don't do it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2020 17:00
|
|
|
boar guy posted:cross posting from the capitalism thread that my landlord wants my wife and i to sign waivers that he's not responsible if somone gets covid while he shows our house (which hes selling now, in the middle of a pandemic, after 13 years of scrupulous rent payments, because he feels like it) Redline the entire thing, add a "lol no", send it back.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2020 17:00
|
|
|
boar guy posted:cross posting from the capitalism thread that my landlord wants my wife and i to sign waivers that he's not responsible if somone gets covid while he shows our house (which hes selling now, in the middle of a pandemic, after 13 years of scrupulous rent payments, because he feels like it) why would you ever sign that
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2020 17:00
|
|
|
Hi, I'm kicking you out of your home. Can you sign this paper taking on my liabilities? I cant actually punish you for this in any form.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2020 17:01
|
|
|
Blitter posted:There will not be a tested and certified vaccine released in the next 4 months. Also keep in mind that in 2020 it’s very important to consider what Donald Trump understands.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2020 17:02
|
|
|
Jabor posted:You sure it's not going to end up like dengue fever, where a vaccine that's mostly-ineffective actually makes it more lethal if you do catch it? To me, that seems somewhat plausible for something where an immune system overresponse is what causes a significant amount of the damage. I hope it doesn't turn out that way. Pharma companies who've made serious mistakes in the past have lost enough stock value to be straight up purchased by competitors for pennies on the dollar. I hope that's enough of a risk that companies won't try to pass something like that off as a viable vaccine.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2020 17:03
|
|
|
Make sure you have renters insurance and then burn the house down
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2020 17:08
|
|
|
haha we worked so hard to stay safe, too. our kid has seen the sun like 6 times since st patricks day gently caress this gay earth
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2020 17:09
|
|
|
central dogma posted:I hope it doesn't turn out that way. Pharma companies who've made serious mistakes in the past have lost enough stock value to be straight up purchased by competitors for pennies on the dollar. I hope that's enough of a risk that companies won't try to pass something like that off as a viable vaccine. So you're back to just hoping and trusting in market capitalism? It's gonna gently caress ya every time buddy
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2020 17:12
|
|
|
I have a dark vision of a hellworld where any potential vaccine isn't tested on good, god fearing (white) Americans anyways, but on expendable humans in the third world, who have vastly less legal and civil protection. Surely Big Pharma wouldn't do that, right?
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2020 17:12
|
|
|
Polio Vax Scene posted:you mean like these medical professionals? This is an unprecedented pandemic virus and at the beginning, they were literally shotgunning it and trying anything that may remotely have a chance. The fact that orange idiot grasped onto it and made it his goto argument doesn’t change the fact that doctors all over the world were trying whatever they could thing of that may remotely have had a chance. In a fast moving pandemic poo poo gets missed, screwed up, results aren’t published immediately, etc. If you read the article you posted, you’ll see: quote:Doctors and pharmacists from more than half a dozen large healthcare systems in New York, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Ohio, Washington and California told Reuters they are routinely using hydroxychloroquine on patients hospitalized with COVID-19. At the same time, several said they have seen no evidence that the drug, used for years to treat malaria and autoimmune disorders, has any effect on the virus. Patients that don’t know any better may request it because orange daddy talked about it on the news, but doctors are not trying this drug because trump said so. They’re doing it’s been used in the past, risk profiles are known and even though it may (and has shown to be true that it will) have bad consequences in the future, perhaps you wouldn’t die immediately. And that’s what they were doing in the beginning. Patients in the covid trials that are close to death that I’m working on are getting everything - convalescent plasma, hydroxychloroquine, dexamethasone, experimental drugs, etc. That says a lot about how patients and families can push the American hospital system (ie - give my family member anything that may have a chance of not letting them die right now doc! Oh, but it better not give them <any other medical issue>!)but medicine, like science is hypothesis based. If a drug to treat you has the possibility to keep you from imminent death in a pandemic, they will probably try it. To clarify - I am not saying we should be giving hydroxychloroquine to anyone. But, think hard about what you (or if you were intubated, your family) would say if the doctor told you that you would likely die in the next few hours/days, but there’s a drug that we can try that may have some bad effects, but it may allow you to live. What do you think your/your family’s reaction would be? AreWeDrunkYet posted:You're missing the point. Yes, the FDA isn't making the vaccine, but some people right now are not convinced that the FDA currently has the teeth to keep the actual producers honest. Your point about the FDA is probably correct. My point is that the drug manufacturers have previously always had to work within the (previously properly run and enforced) FDA constraints and just because they are toothless now, doesn’t mean the machinery that has always been chugging along in drug trials is just going to go, “oh we won’t do this part because the FDA isn’t watching”. Obviously, that potential for fraud always exists. I can’t be 100% sure that they wouldn’t. Be vigilant. I’m not saying this in a flippant way, but what are you worried about? I assume it’s that they wouldn’t publish known adverse reactions, correct? That there would be thousands of adverse reactions that wouldn’t get published? Or a rare one that happens to one in 10k or 100k? With so much scrutiny on this by the public, if the vaccine was approved and company published their known adverse reactions and it didn’t include something really bad, do you think the thousands of people who worked on the drug trials won’t say anything? What about the people that it happened to? Do you think the drug company is going to go around paying tons of people off to keep quiet? I mean, I guess that’s possible too, but it’s a little conspiracy theory-ish. My final thought is that yes, there is a nonzero chance of fraud. But with the amount of scrutiny, by the public and even a broken FDA, the odds are that once the vaccines are approved, the risks/benefits will be known by everyone at the same time. I’m not saying the faceless drug company will always be 100% truthful, but with everyone watching it, I think they have to be.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2020 17:19
|
|
|
Tipps posted:I have a dark vision of a hellworld where any potential vaccine isn't tested on good, god fearing (white) Americans anyways, but on expendable humans in the third world, who have vastly less legal and civil protection. Third world? American and Chinese concentration camps exist right now why bother going to the third world?
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2020 17:20
|
|
|
boar guy posted:haha we worked so hard to stay safe, too. our kid has seen the sun like 6 times since st patricks day do you need a squad? im sick of lovely landlords. we dipped out of our lease in the middle of the night without telling anyone to avoid any situation resembling yours.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2020 17:23
|
|
|
central dogma posted:I hope it doesn't turn out that way. Pharma companies who've made serious mistakes in the past have lost enough stock value to be straight up purchased by competitors for pennies on the dollar. I hope that's enough of a risk that companies won't try to pass something like that off as a viable vaccine. oxford is a public university not a pharma company
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2020 17:29
|
|
|
like just in case anyone forgot that the leading vaccine candidate undergoing worldwide trials is not actually from a pharma company
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2020 17:30
|
|
|
Cacafuego posted:
I think you can make statistics say whatever you want. I also think that data quality coming out of Brazil for the 2/3 phase of the trial is going to be more suspect than data coming out of, say, most EU countries, Japan, or larger academic institutions in the US. Collecting, verifying, and cleaning data that quickly can lead to misses. For example, I worked on a trial where we discovered that a hospital in South Korea had recorded the weight of every patient as exactly the same weight they had at the first visit (5 year long trial-unlikely). They didn't see why the weight needed to be taken at every visit and technically the form didn't say "current weight". This was a minor thing (weight changes weren't something we were looking at - med device trial), but it goes to show that cultural factors and lack of clarity about the data being collected can be a thing if trial monitoring and data evaluation are rushed. I don't think my company would push something out that is shown to be dangerous. However, they have already sunk a ton of money into this and have manufacturing in place, ready to start as soon as the data reads out. So there is going to be a ton of pressure on everyone involved, from the site monitors to the statisticians, to make sure that every AE and SAE actually meets the criteria, possibly leading to some exclusions that shouldn't have been made based on the judgement of fairly low level people. I haven't seen anything that said the FDA was looking at hydroxychloroquine as a treatment. I think the EMA jumped the bandwagon on that one since it already had approval and it was off-brand use. I'm also skeptical of the Remdesovir approval, since studies outside the US seemed to find no benefit. Overall I trust the EMA a lot more than I trust the FDA at this point. Oxford developed the vaccine, but they don't have the infrastructure to do a clinical trial like this, so once it is in trial, I think AZ has control.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2020 17:31
|
|
|
Cacafuego posted:I’m not saying this in a flippant way, but what are you worried about? I'm not the poster you're referring to, but I've been following along. The worry is that the health care industry is a for-profit industry. Salaries, bonuses, and employment itself is all based around selling product. Anyone that has any understanding of the history of Capitalism knows exactly what we're all worried about. Basically, until we can socialize the health care industry, we're going to be loving nervous as poo poo about anything being pushed out during a pandemic where the POTUS is willing to let people inject loving bleach into their eyeballs if it meant his approval ratings would go up half a percent.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2020 17:38
|
|
|
Tipps posted:I have a dark vision of a hellworld where any potential vaccine isn't tested on good, god fearing (white) Americans anyways, but on expendable humans in the third world, who have vastly less legal and civil protection.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2020 17:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 21:12 |
|
|
Philthy posted:I'm not the poster you're referring to, but I've been following along. The worry is that the health care industry is a for-profit industry. Salaries, bonuses, and employment itself is all based around selling product. Anyone that has any understanding of the history of Capitalism knows exactly what we're all worried about. Plus if the vaccine fails and the company goes bankrupt, the directors will have already received a huge payout for WINNING! against the virus and they'll personally have a golden parachute clause anyway. We did our best, certain things may have been overlooked, good intentions, etc. etc. etc. while thousands more people continue to suffer.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2020 18:09
|
|
