Wasn't "rushed to market" always an accusation from the anti-vaxxers? Trump also flogged Ivermectin and internal use of light and bleach therapy.I'll never forget the video of Dr. Birx trying to disappear into her scarf during that press conference.
His pitting of states against each other to get scarce medical supplies was fascinating. I loved the Maryland Governor and his wife's clandestine mask import caper. Fun times.
I've never heard the initial vaccines were rushed to market, they had them a month or so after the pandemic started, and yes vast numbers of people could have been saved if they actually "rushed them to market" then. But they went through all the trials etc..
And even getting them to market when we did, I think it's very hard to argue we should have just kept letting people die at the unvaccinated rate, in search of the perfect vaccine that will have an absolute zero rate of very rare complications. How does that make sense? J&J wasn't the best maybe. I think mRNA might not end up being the best we can do either, but no way vaccines should have been delayed even further with hospitalizations and deaths piling up.
Trees don't grow on money
Hell, trump said covid was "fake news". Then as noted above, his reaction was to drink bleach and other such nonsense. If he would have been on the ball, many less would have died.
First, he tried to keep our numbers low by refusing to allow people off cruise ships, as I recall. Remember "We just have 15 cases, and in a week or two, we'll be down to close to zero." He also famously said "If we stop testing, we'll have fewer cases."That was Desantis' approach too, as I recall.
Trump wanted to rush the vaccine. He was very angry that it wasn’t out before the election. But the fda followed their standard procedures and cleared it once all the necessary studying of it was complete regardless of what that windbag wanted.
Emergency use declarations are not political. Very smart and experienced physicians give info which is scrutinized by the FDA. They weigh the evidence to decide the risks
And benefits. Mrna technology was developed in the 60's and 70's. Often technologies remain stagnant until an application comes along that will benefit a lot of people.
My husband is in a clinical trial in a major cancer center. His MD was presenting to the FDA last week. The trial has been so successful they are anticipating it will fast track to level two. He is in level one. Formerly his diagnosis would have been a death sentence. Every single person who completed the trial is alive and has no evidence of cancer.
Also the Mrna technology was in trialsfor cancer patients. For some diagnoses it has shown great promise.
This is not about politics. It is about trusting hard working dedicated scientists and physicians whose sole mission is to save lives. I spend days in waiting rooms and see the hope, pain and resilience of human spirit. Keyboard warriors can post whatever they want, but I 100% trust my husbands physicians. Their intelligence, experience and dedication is remarkable.
If vaccines had not been fast tracked imagine how many more people would have died. It is not about Trump or Biden, it was about putting money into technology that showed millions of lives would be saved.
I didn't say they were, I think you're confusing me for JP1. I was just pointing out that one of his statements was incorrect, fast tracking is not and never has been standard FDA approval process, but that doesn't mean I don't approve of it when warranted.
As an aside, I also understand that some people may be concerned that fast tracking may result in a sub-standard product with unknown results and they may be reluctant to rush out to inject it in their, or their children's, bodies. That doesn't make them the evil science denying dangers to society as they are often presented.
"Things should be made as simple as possible, but not one bit simpler." ~ Albert Einstein
There are currently 3 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 3 guests)