4 ms·
You're saying we should have kept giving placebos to a bunch of people after the trial has calculated 90%+ protection for a widespread infectious disease? Would
by pedrocr 5y ago
You're saying we should have kept giving placebos to a bunch of people after the trial has calculated 90%+ protection for a widespread infectious disease? Would any review board actually clear such a study?
- breck 5y ago100% yes. In a heartbeat. ~30,000 volunteers with just a placebo against a disease with a >99% survival rate vs having NO CONTROL GROUP for a new class of vaccines that we inject in over 1,000,000,000 people. We have diseases with fatality rates of 50% that we still keep placebo groups for. This was not a hard decision. We had a very clear scientific way to judge the long term efficacy of the vaccines but they dropped it. It was not to save lives—the math doesn't add up—it was because they made the sale and didn't want to "sell past the close".
- pedrocr 5y agoLets just presume you somehow sell that idea to the review board. How do you actually recruit for such a study? Who are these people that are willing to enter a lottery to receive the vaccine or placebo and won't just pop on over to the vaccination center and just get the vaccine for sure?