It's OK To Let People Take Risks for Medical Science
A recent study finds that human challenge trials are largely safe.
Less than two months after President Donald Trump declared the spread of the coronavirus responsible for COVID-19 a national emergency on March 13, 2020, I called for human challenge trials to quickly vet the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines. The Trump administration's Operation Warp Speed initiative was shortly thereafter announced; it aimed to "accelerate the development, manufacturing, and distribution of COVID-19 vaccines, therapeutics, and diagnostics."
Human challenge trials in which candidate vaccines and placebos are administered to consenting volunteers would certainly have cranked up the warp speed for COVID-19 vaccine deployment. Once vaccinated, the volunteers would be exposed to the COVID-19 virus to test the effectiveness of the vaccines in comparison to placebos for preventing and/or ameliorating infections. Such testing would have made it possible for vaccines to be deployed months before Pfizer's mRNA vaccine was finally given an emergency use authorization by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on December 11, 2020.
Prominent bioethicists argued that allowing healthy people to volunteer for COVID-19 vaccine human challenge trials would be no more dangerous than many other altruistic activities for which people are allowed to volunteer. Such activities include joining the military, volunteer firefighting, serving as living organ donors, and participating in phase 1 clinical trials. And volunteers for COVID-19 vaccine human challenge trials were not lacking. By June 2020, more than 28,000 people had volunteered to participate in such trials on 1Day Sooner, a website organized by a group of young researchers.
A recent study in the journal Clinical Infectious Diseases analyzes the adverse effects on volunteers in 308 human challenge trials involving over 15,000 participants since 1980. The researchers looked at "how risky such trials have been, how often adverse events (AEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs) occur, and whether risk mitigation measures have been effective." AEs refer to "any untoward medical occurrence associated with the use of a drug in humans" and SAEs include death, hospitalization, disability, permanent damage, or other important medical events.
The researchers found that only 24 (0.2 percent) of the volunteers in the human challenge trials they analyzed experienced SAEs. Among these were 10 volunteers in E. coli and Norovirus studies that suffered episodes of severe diarrhea and vomiting and 7 malaria treatment volunteers who experienced cardiac and liver issues that resolved without permanent harm. The researchers note that zero deaths occurred in these trials. The researchers observe, "It is unlikely that any SAEs captured in this review were life-threatening because the events were primarily brief hospitalizations for observation or supportive care requiring noninvasive interventions."
No serious adverse events were reported in the United Kingdom human challenge trial in which volunteers were exposed to the COVID-19 virus so that researchers could carefully track the natural course of the infection.
Would jumpstarting the administration of COVID-19 vaccines using safety and efficacy data obtained quickly from human challenge trials have averted more deaths, hospitalizations, and the sheer misery of illness than actually occurred? Yes. After all, a July 2022 report estimated that 10 months after their rollout in December 2020, the COVID-19 vaccines may have averted around 27 million infections, 1.6 million hospitalizations, and 235,000 deaths. Conversely, an April 2023 study calculates that between May 2021 and September 2022, at least 232,000 deaths could have been prevented among unvaccinated adults in the United States had they been vaccinated with the original COVID-19 vaccines.
With respect to adverse events, it is worth noting that a February 2023 study evaluated the death reports for COVID-19 vaccine recipients in the United States in the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). The researchers found that the death rates for vaccinated people were lower than the all-cause death rates expected in the general population. Consequently, they observe, "These findings do not suggest an association between vaccination and overall increased mortality."
Given that other infectious diseases with pandemic potential are lurking out in the wild, our public health authorities (the FDA and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) need urgently to develop and deploy a logistical and ethical framework for approving human challenge trials for vaccines sooner rather than later. The sorry performance of those agencies over the last three years infuriatingly suggests that that will not happen.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
This wasn't enough for Sqrlsy, JFree and White Mike. They wanted to force participation, banning people from restaurants and firing them from their jobs for refusing to participate in the experiment.
The douchebags want forgiveness without even having to admit wrongdoing.
I am making a good salary from home $6580-$7065/week , which is amazing under a year ago I was jobless in a horrible economy. I thank God every day I was blessed with these instructions and now it’s my duty to pay it forward and share it with Everyone,
🙂 AND GOOD LUCK.:)
Here is I started.……......>> http://WWW.RICHEPAY.COM
Don't forget denying them healthcare.
This is the Achilles heel of socialized medicine.
They can take it away on a whim.
Full easy and very simple online money earning job to makes dollars online.from this job i have made $64296 in just 4 months. i just gave this Jobs myspare time after my whole busy day because i am a student and this job changesmy life completely. so simple Jobs no special skills required for this job. getthis by follow instructions on this page.
.
.
HERE ————————————————->> https://Www.Coins71.Com
For the people who want to be put in charge of the socialized healthcare, that's a feature and not a bug.
And a WHOLE lot of useful idiots think that they'll be the ones in charge of it.
Been there. Done that. Spent the earnings on improving myself.
Last month i managed to pull my first five figure paycheck ever!!! I've been working for this company online for 2 years now and i never been happier.They are paying me $95/per hour and the best thing is cause i am not that tech-savy, they only asked for basic understanding of internet and basic typing skill.It's been an amazing experience working with them and i wanted to share this with you, because they are looking for new people to join their team now and i highly recommend to everyone to apply...
Visit following page for more information.................>>> http://www.works75.com
I called for human challenge trials to quickly vet the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines.
We got one. A really, really big one. Billions of trial participants.
For some reason I don’t understand they didn’t want a control group.
Bailey spent most of his time propping up shit testing. Testing used to butress the population freak out.
Policies create incentives. Just because the experiments proposed *now* are relatively harmless doesn't mean that if they were allowed, they would stay that way--the looser the standards, the more risky the experiments that would get proposed by scientists pushing the envelope.
This article brought to you by the lawyers at 1-800-BAD-DRUG.
Not one mention of mention of the Nuremberg codes.
I guess everything old is new again.
Alt text: “The Tuskegee experiments are dope!”
Phbbbt! Get with the times Ron! People and their own agency is so 2015. This is 2023. Unless women have a right to get pregnant and subject themselves to teratogen testing and teachers aren’t free to subject students to fundamentally scientifically bankrupt experimentation* without anyone’s consent, democracy will have failed humanity.
*Remember, I’ve told you multiply that, in the background of compulsory and fundamentally dishonest medical and scientific malpractice, your quibbles about *science* are less than meaningless doodles in the margin.
Last month i managed to pull my first five figure paycheck ever!!! I've been working for this company online for 2 years now and i never been happier.They are paying me $95/per hour and the best thing is cause i am not that tech-savy, they only asked for basic understanding of internet and basic typing skill.It's been an amazing experience working with them and i wanted to share this with you, because they are looking for new people to join their team now and i highly recommend to everyone to apply...
Visit following page for more information.................>>> http://www.works75.com
So the human trials were safe and the vaccine saved lives. Not a surprising result but good to see some quantitative analysis,
Who cares about the people who died.
Please kill youself.
Not a single bald narrative you won't push is there. Ignore the excess deaths from non covid due to the reaction, trust your government. Ignore the death rates matched population death statistics, trust faucis blind claims of millions saved. Good work shrike.
Still not shrike, you lying POS. And this article completely wrecks your bullshit. Since you're talking about excess deaths, how many excess deaths were there? And how many of those were due to the vaccine, not COVID?
One piece of evidence: https://ysph.yale.edu/news-article/study-finds-large-gap-in-excess-deaths-along-partisan-lines-after-covid-19-vaccines-introduced/
How does it wreck my shit shrike? What did I say that was false?
I mean it got so bad even MSN had to report it.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/non-covid-excess-deaths-why-are-they-rising/ar-AAZg6Lb
I can give you dozens of studies on it, but you won’t read it. Narratives are all that matter to you. How to protect the left and government.
By the way shrike. If you actually read the abstract of the study in your PR piece you would see the authors warn against using it to infer politician motivation as they did not parse based on political party. But you blindly push the narrative. Youre an uneducated retard shrike.
I read peer-reviewed research. Your constant reference to narratives is projection.
My last salary was $8750 just ecom worked 12 hours a week. My neighbor has long found an estimate of $16,000″ (u113 and works about 20 hours for seven days…I can’t believe how easy was after
trying the info… payusadollars
LOL…. “our public health authorities (the FDA and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) need urgently to” …. “The sorry performance of” … “suggests that that will not happen.”
Summary… “If only [our] socialism would work!!!”
It’s funny how dumbfounded the socialist club can be about their perfect record of failure. Try a little less socialism fanboy-ism and a lot more learning from the *already* tried past.
Maybe there was a reason the US founders didn't enumerate a federal power for food, drug and disease regulation.
That's useful enough, but taking risks is not always right.
So I've been musing in the comments the last few days about why left coast media, politicians and cities have suddenly started noticing across the last month or so about how there are uh, these uh, problems, and uh, they might need addressing and uh, well, we're not going to say that it's bad, but it's bad and this got bad while we were in charge and uh, just so you know, we're the only ones qualified to fix it.
I've been wondering why so many articles in the media have popped up and I think the answer is probably simpler than I thought.
Nordstrom leaves [37th safest city on the planet]* downtown San Francisco, joining big-city retail exodus
*notice the sudden pivot by blue-bubblers about how 'safe' San Francisco is when discussing crime.
The city is the nth Safest City-- anywhere! When a mob of people dash into a store when you're standing at the counter, smash all the cases, grab everything they can in a frenzy of crazed shoplifting but no one was technically assaulted, that was a "safe" activity.
El Oh El.
Mother's day is coming up. It was mostly peaceful shopping to honor Mom. Why do you hate Mom?
The city is the nth Safest City– anywhere!
And, of course, they're using the most inclusive definition of the word 'city' to include places with ~5,000 inhabitants to really drive home the factual veracity and not the 100K+ inhabitants definition which would relegate it more to "Of all the places people congregate to perpetrate crimes against each other, we're the 37th worst!"
So the need more testing guy Bailey is for people taking risks so he doesn't have to take risks? Is that the summary that he wants so he can finally leave his house?
The vaccine did not prevent 27 million cases of Covid.
Even the cdc has admitted that the vaccine does not prevent infection.
Now they claim it is a kind of therapeutic
You are starting with a false premise.
Thanks for the honest article, and thanks for having stood up for the truth.
Nothing could be more unethical, than to refuse people the right to sacrifice themselves for the public good.
The public authorities were intimidated by one another and by the media. And by profoundlyg dishonest human rights lawyers and professional ethicists, whose self-importance depends on opposing things like this.
It seems from the comments that the libertarian audience mostly has the same dangerous self-serving biases as the human rights lawyers, regulators, and professional ethicists.
Thousands died as a consequence of the irresponsible exercise of those biases, probably millions worldwide. There is no accountability for it, and very little learning.
Britain under BoJo found the courage to defy the false ethnicists and get challenge testing underway. They did it late but better than never.