9 ms·

It's very odd that dogs can get vaccinated for Lyme but not humans...

peteretep 6y ago
We can also have dogs "put to sleep" but not people. You can also keep a dog on a leash. If a dog dies, there's no need for a coroner's report. It's not _that_ odd that human and dog medicine are held to different levels of testing and safety.
- thaumasiotes 6y ago
  > We can also have dogs "put to sleep" but not people. It's not like this is without controversy; it's an active political battle.
  - KraftKacke 6y ago
    I think this was rather implying we put down dogs, if they break too expensive to fix. The vaccine was probably grinding through loads of "pets" in development. Very different than "putting down" terminally ill people on their own choice and action. Tho, maybe similar to the eugenic endeavors of the past. I hope you're not implying that's what's in debate again.
- gizmo686 6y ago
  > We can also have dogs "put to sleep" but not people. Depending on where you live, you can have humans "put to sleep" as well. It is legal in 9 US states, Canada, parts of Australlia, and probably otherplaces as well. > You can also keep a dog on a leash. Some people keep their children on a leash as well.
  - tshaddox 6y ago
    I think in most of those places you have to ask the human first.
    - eyelidlessness 6y ago
      No, people just put their kids on leashes in public. It’s... well, wild but the opposite.
gbrown 6y ago
You can orally actually vaccinate the reservoir species (mice) in targeted areas as well to disrupt the enzootic cycle.
hangonhn 6y ago
Pets are considered property in all fifty states (Although in CA there are laws being proposed or even passed to change some of that). Any injuries or death to a pet only requires replacement cost.
throwaway13337 6y ago
Agreed. I wonder about the trolley problem that is medical testing requirements. It seems like we, as a society, would tend to never want to pull the lever to save more at the cost of risking a few. Social and contractual liability makes it a bad trade. Acceptable risk is very low which can, paradoxically, cause more death and discomfort. It would be nice to see a greater awareness of the tradeoffs. These things tend to get emotional, though, so not much gets done. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem
- rtpg 6y ago
  You can't make trolley problem tradeoffs when there's enough uncertainty involved in all the steps. Older medicine is filled with supposed cures to issues that cause issues down the road. We also have countless medical trials that show no positive effects on the disease it's trying to cure, and outright ill effects (both short term and long term). If we _did_ have visibility and a good understanding of the effects of stuff, you would think that Covid, of all things, would push at least some people more down this argument you are making. But basically everyone involved (including many many people who had extreme incentives to push a vaccine through) stuck to the trial discussions. I do understand the "Extenuating circumstances" argument. But this sort of massive generality reeks of Dunning-Krueger.
- blackrock 6y ago
  Theoretical question here: Do you want to be the one sacrificial lamb that dies, in order for the rest of us to live? If you want to play Jesus here, then I’m sure the rest of society will support you.
  - maxerickson 6y ago
    It isn't that stark though. There are current policy choices that result in statistical deaths. Other policy choices are quite likely to result in fewer statistical deaths, but you've somehow decided that the current policy is not even up for discussion.
- tim333 6y ago
Symmetry 6y ago
We've also have coronavirus vaccines for dogs for a long time. More tolerance for side effects means easier approval means more vaccines which haven't been proven safe to the standards we demand for use in humans.

We can also have dogs "put to sleep" but not people. You can also keep a dog on a leash. If a dog dies, there's no need for a coroner's report. It's not _that_ odd that human and dog medicine are held to different levels of testing and safety.

thaumasiotes 6y ago
> We can also have dogs "put to sleep" but not people. It's not like this is without controversy; it's an active political battle.
- KraftKacke 6y ago
  I think this was rather implying we put down dogs, if they break too expensive to fix. The vaccine was probably grinding through loads of "pets" in development. Very different than "putting down" terminally ill people on their own choice and action. Tho, maybe similar to the eugenic endeavors of the past. I hope you're not implying that's what's in debate again.
gizmo686 6y ago
> We can also have dogs "put to sleep" but not people. Depending on where you live, you can have humans "put to sleep" as well. It is legal in 9 US states, Canada, parts of Australlia, and probably otherplaces as well. > You can also keep a dog on a leash. Some people keep their children on a leash as well.
- tshaddox 6y ago
  I think in most of those places you have to ask the human first.
  - eyelidlessness 6y ago
    No, people just put their kids on leashes in public. It’s... well, wild but the opposite.

gbrown 6y ago

You can orally actually vaccinate the reservoir species (mice) in targeted areas as well to disrupt the enzootic cycle.

hangonhn 6y ago

Pets are considered property in all fifty states (Although in CA there are laws being proposed or even passed to change some of that). Any injuries or death to a pet only requires replacement cost.

throwaway13337 6y ago

Agreed. I wonder about the trolley problem that is medical testing requirements. It seems like we, as a society, would tend to never want to pull the lever to save more at the cost of risking a few. Social and contractual liability makes it a bad trade. Acceptable risk is very low which can, paradoxically, cause more death and discomfort. It would be nice to see a greater awareness of the tradeoffs. These things tend to get emotional, though, so not much gets done. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem

rtpg 6y ago
You can't make trolley problem tradeoffs when there's enough uncertainty involved in all the steps. Older medicine is filled with supposed cures to issues that cause issues down the road. We also have countless medical trials that show no positive effects on the disease it's trying to cure, and outright ill effects (both short term and long term). If we _did_ have visibility and a good understanding of the effects of stuff, you would think that Covid, of all things, would push at least some people more down this argument you are making. But basically everyone involved (including many many people who had extreme incentives to push a vaccine through) stuck to the trial discussions. I do understand the "Extenuating circumstances" argument. But this sort of massive generality reeks of Dunning-Krueger.
blackrock 6y ago
Theoretical question here: Do you want to be the one sacrificial lamb that dies, in order for the rest of us to live? If you want to play Jesus here, then I’m sure the rest of society will support you.
- maxerickson 6y ago
  It isn't that stark though. There are current policy choices that result in statistical deaths. Other policy choices are quite likely to result in fewer statistical deaths, but you've somehow decided that the current policy is not even up for discussion.
tim333 6y ago

Symmetry 6y ago

We've also have coronavirus vaccines for dogs for a long time. More tolerance for side effects means easier approval means more vaccines which haven't been proven safe to the standards we demand for use in humans.