Get vaccinated!

[JBC1824]

(None of the information in this assuredly imperfect breakdown is meant to be taken as medical advice. When making serious decisions about your health, you should talk to your doctor.)

78crusader,

Let me begin by saying this, I tend to be extremely skeptical of conventional medicine....

Our World in Data seems to show different figures, while still demonstrating an increase in the number of covid hospitalizations presently in the UK as compared with this time last year. The rate of increase is not nearly as pronounced however.

https://ourworldindata.org/covid-hospitalizations

Very important context/additional information would be needed before any conclusions could be drawn.

For instance, was testing less available in the UK in July of 2020, such that the number of covid cases associated with hospitalization would have been underrepresented then? This information is widely available; I just don't feel like looking it up. It isn't central to the point I'm trying to make really.

People were also advised earlier during the pandemic to stay at home rather than go to the hospital unless symptoms became severe. This could be another important factor.

Furthermore, does the increase in hospitalizations reflect only the natural spread of the virus? Vaccination itself is not a guarantee against virus contraction.

There are also ebbs and flows in case rates and hospitalizations. We commonly hear of a "spike" in cases or hospitalizations in a particular part of the world.

On their own, those numbers really are meaningless.

I believe a somewhat better observational indicator of whether or not the vaccines are effective would be to compare vaccination rates to the rates of covid diagnosis across locations. After all, you cannot be hospitalized from covid or die from it, unless you contract it in the first place.

And when you compare vaccination rates to disease frequency between the states, higher vaccination rates are evidently associated with lower rates of disease.

The states with higher vaccination rates currently tend to have lower case rates and the states with lower vaccination rates typically have higher case rates.

https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/vaccines/international

https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#cases_casesper100klast7days

The best indicators of vaccine success remain the real-world studies whereas by design they do a better job controlling for all of the variables than simpler observations like the ones we've discussed can. Studies do show us the vaccines are highly effective.

https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2021/p0514-covid-19-vaccine-effectiveness.html

And vaccine effectiveness has been confirmed by overseas data from studies with no ties to either the CDC or any pharmaceutical companies.

https://www.eurosurveillance.org/content/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2021.26.21.2100438

However, are there legitimate questions about whether or not covid vaccines will provide protection against newly evolved strains and potential vaccine side-effects, particularly long-term ones? Yes, there are. The jury is very much still out on all of this.

Also, have other, readily available and effective treatments for covid been marginalized so the drug companies could increase profits? It is my opinion this is true. 

[78crusader]

COVID-19 cases in the US:

July 16, 2020 78,389
July 16, 2021 76,324

I don't know if the vaccines only have short term efficacy. However, these numbers are very hard to ignore.

Paul

[vu84v2]

COVID-19 cases in the US:

July 16, 2020 78,389
July 16, 2021 76,324

I don't know if the vaccines only have short term efficacy. However, these numbers are very hard to ignore.

Paul

Is the COVID-19 virus the same today as it was one year ago? No, the Delta variant is much more virulent.

How many cases, hospitalizations and deaths are associated with vaccinated versus unvaccinated people? It seems like cases and hospitalizations are far more prevalent for unvaccinated people (see reports in the last few weeks from Maryland, North Carolina and Los Angeles County).

If people are just looking at numbers reported like those in 78crusader's post, it is scary how they acquire and process information in their lives.

Frankly, the work that Pfizer, Moderna and J&J have done to create vaccines that have strong efficacy not only against the original version of the virus, but also the recent variants, is truly amazing.

[vu84v2]

I agree with the supporting detail from JBC1824 regarding the efficacy of the vaccine. To the points that were raised at the end:

However, are there legitimate questions about whether or not covid vaccines will provide protection against newly evolved strains ==> this, of course, is impossible to answer because doing so would require accurately predicting how a virus would evolve and how such variants take hold. That said, it is pretty amazing that the vaccines continue to be effective against these new variants.

However, are there legitimate questions about potential vaccine side-effects, particularly long-term ones? Yes, there are. The jury is very much still out on all of this. ==> Ok, I will grant that this is not 100% (what is certain?)...but it seems that a wide range of true experts have verified this as best they can (and continue to do so). There was a report from several months ago that was cited today that 12 people are creating ~60% of the misinformation on the internet about the vaccines. None of these people has any educational, research or practical experience with immunology, public health, infectious diseases, etc. (note that 12 people seem to span the political spectrum - so this is not intended to be a political statement). Beyond that, what alternative do you propose?

Also, have other readily available and effective treatments for covid been marginalized so the drug companies could increase profits? It is my opinion this is true. ==> While you are entitled to your opinion, you nor I know whether this is true or false. Even if it were to be true (which I doubt to the degree that you seem to imply), it does not change whether people should get vaccinated. As previous a previous poster said (perhaps you), talk with your doctor and rely heavily on him or her to make valid recommendations for you based on your health history and his or her knowledge of the vaccines.

[JBC1824]

Vu84v2,

On the important stuff, we are on the same page on this issue.

As to the "legitimate questions" I raised, these are not criticisms, they are just reality. And they should not be interpreted as anything else.

Yes, very few things are certain. Heck, according to some leftists even mathematical certainty isn't so certain, and math more generally is racist!

Of course it is true that well-intentioned people who are far better judges of such things than you or I have decided and continue to decide that the harm profile of the vaccines insofar as it is understood is acceptable.

I am not proposing anything.

I have only stated that which I understand to be true, and I have drawn a clear distinction between this and what is my opinion. Don't unnecessarily complicate things.

I believe FWalum was the first to touch on Ivermectin specifically. He brought up some really good information. My opinion is based on the information available to me about Ivermectin and its usefulness in treating covid and how this relates to the emergency use authorization given to the vaccines. Basically, if Ivermectin was considered an effective means of treating covid, the vaccines would never have been eligible for emergency use.

Ivermectin is also no longer covered under patent, and therefore drug companies don't stand to gain much from its widespread use against covid, including its potential use as a prophylactic.

If you're curious about this issue, you really need to watch both of the following videos:

https://youtu.be/zfqxCkJw0Rk

https://youtu.be/zL9TUjJVoZo

I have not said people should not get vaccinated. I have repeatedly said people should talk to their doctor when deciding whether or not to get vaccinated.

[wh]

"As reported earlier the CDC-linked VAERS website released its weekly numbers last Friday.

The website has now recorded 11,140 reported deaths from the COVID vaccine in the United States. This is up from 9,125 reported deaths from the COVID-19 vaccinations total from last week."

So, that's 2015 more deaths last week from COVID - that weren't caused by COVID. Have I got that right?

[vu84v2]

This, again, is incredibly misleading and dangerous information - and stating it in this manner is grossly irresponsible. These are reported deaths of people who have been vaccinated. While such relationships should be investigated, there is no causal relationship that has been found and most events are likely coincidental (see FWAlum's post on the prior page of this thread - and he is an expert in this area).

What do you hope to gain by posting such grossly irresponsible statements?

[JBC1824]

To be fair, I think wh is just trying to understand the issue better. Could be wrong. Anyway, I don't believe this is necessarily the easiest thing in the world to understand. Otherwise, multiple ppl on this forum wouldn't be struggling.

"Grossly irresponsible?" This is a bit overstated, no?

How many realistically look at this forum, especially this part of the forum? And if these people are then making their medical decisions based solely on what any of us say, well, I wouldn't really know what to say in this case. Not a good idea.

I agree with vu84v2 that looking at some of the previous posts on this topic, FWAlum's in particular, will likely be helpful. Everything that needed to be said on this issue already has been.

But it really boils down to the fact that "correlation is not causation," as vu84v2 has correctly suggested at least a few times. This is one of the most critical concepts to understanding data.

[wh]

EXCLUSIVE: More Evidence Leaked from China on the Deliberate Release of COVID-19 by the Chinese Military

"It was specifically designed to be highly contagious, but often asymptomatic, have low lethality, but produce uncontrollable variants and possessing characteristics providing plausible deniability as a bioweapon."

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/07/report-deliberate-release-covid-19-chinese-military/

[wh]

This, again, is incredibly misleading and dangerous information - and stating it in this manner is grossly irresponsible. These are reported deaths of people who have been vaccinated. While such relationships should be investigated, there is no causal relationship that has been found and most events are likely coincidental (see FWAlum's post on the prior page of this thread - and he is an expert in this area).

What do you hope to gain by posting such grossly irresponsible statements?

Remind us... What is the real number again? Is it still 0, or whatever you claimed earlier?

First off, I got vaccinated, and I'm glad I did. At my age, the risk of dying from COVID is far greater than the risk of dying from the vaccine. I'm also not concerned about possible harmful long term side effects, given that I'm at about 9 or 10p on the life clock. I've also been vocal in encouraging fellow baby boomer friends and family members to get vaccinated.

That said, I can see where those in my children's and grandchildren's generations would naturally be more leery, given that the chance of a healthy child or adult dying from COVID is almost nil. IMO the CDC is exacerbating the problem by essentially claiming that there is ZERO risk of dying from the vaccine and poo-pooing 100% of 9000+ death claims. That simply isn't believable. There isn't a vaccine in history that would make such a bizarre claim.

So, what is the truth? Is it 0, is it 9000, or is it something in between? Are there possible long term side effects that will make otherwise healthy people rue the day they got vaccinated, or are there not? Thus, is the credibility problem the CDC has created for itself. The "irresponsibility" of reporting "misinformation" does not lie in reposting an article that accurately quotes a publicly reported government statistic that 9000+ deaths COULD be connected to the COVID vaccine. The irresponsibility is in the CDC's fantastic counter claim that NO ONE, ANYWHERE, ANYTIME has died from the vaccine.

[bbtds]

Alabama Republican Gov. Ivey says 'start blaming the unvaccinated folks' for rise in Covid cases

"Folks are supposed to have common sense. But it's time to start blaming the unvaccinated folks, not the regular folks. It's the unvaccinated folks that are letting us down," Ivey told reporters in Birmingham.

Alabama is the least vaccinated state in the country, with roughly 33.9% of residents fully vaccinated, according to data from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Average daily Covid-19 cases in Alabama are nearly double what they were a week ago, and more than four times higher than they were two weeks ago.

[FWalum]

But it really boils down to the fact that "correlation is not causation," as vu84v2 has correctly suggested at least a few times. This is one of the most critical concepts to understanding data.

Very well said. Once again my main concern is that everyone, scientists included, seem to be gravitating towards one pole or the other, leaving no one in the middle to rationally and objectively review and research for the good of humanity. For example, I found a recent interview with a MD and PHD, external analyst for the World Health Organization, and an expert in analysis of medical evidence, to be very concerning when this was said about Ivermectin, and I quote "I've never seen such a huge body of evidence being ignored. Many of the recommendations that are made on guideline panels that I have been involved with are based on far less evidence, recommendations in favor".

People are dying, I don't care if they have been vaccinated or not. There seems to be this crazy blame game going on that only the unvaccinated are dying and they deserve what is coming to them... really? Stories written like 'It's too late': Alabama doctor shares final moments of Covid patients, urges vaccination. I wonder if she tried this protocol FLCCCA Treatment Protocols for COVID-19, probably not because the CDC, FDA and NIH haven't approved the use of many of these drugs for the treatment of COVID-19. Try everything and anything, this shouldn't have anything to do with politics.

[valpopal]

The dominant media are pushing a narrative that white Republicans are the main constituency reluctant to receive vaccinations. However, they seem to be overlooking a revealing statistic. According to the CDC, among racial groups African Americans are the group lagging in vaccinations. As of this week, 48% of the total population of Whites have received at least one dose. (Almost 70% of the adult population in the United States have received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine.) On the other hand, only 36% of the total population of Blacks have received at least one dose. "White people received a higher share of vaccinations compared to their share of cases in most states reporting data."


This is not a political issue. The statistics do not vary much from Republican-led states or Democrat-led states. In fact, an example of Democrat-controlled states are as follows: California 60%-45%, -15% among Blacks; New York 52%-37%, -15% among Blacks; Connecticut 64%-44%, -20% among Blacks; Wisconsin 50%-33%, -17% among Blacks. In the District of Columbia, 33% of Black people have received vaccinations, while they make up 56% of cases, 71% of deaths. For those interested, Indiana 45%-34%, -11% among Blacks.


The irresponsible narrative by much of the media has attempted to point at Republicans as culprits; however, African Americans are the most reliable Democrat base and the most reluctant to get vaccinated. A health crisis should be a unifying event and not be politicized by anyone in the media. 

[JBC1824]

But it really boils down to the fact that "correlation is not causation," as vu84v2 has correctly suggested at least a few times. This is one of the most critical concepts to understanding data.

Try everything and anything, this shouldn't have anything to do with politics.

This is a bit of a rant, but I think I was able to connect a few dots....

The reason everything and anything hasn't been tried yet and very likely never will be isn't because of politics really.

It's because covid is the endless gold mine the pharmaceutical companies could never have imagined: a virus that mutates into new variants at such a rate that in all likelihood everyone will have to receive a new vaccine every couple of years. It simply couldn't be more perfect.

Thus, there is an incredibly powerful financial disincentive regarding whether to investigate existing medications (most no longer under patent, including Ivermectin) being used for other purposes as potential covid therapeutics and/or prophylactics.

If there is less or essentially no money to be made accomplishing something one way, be assured that the pharmaceutical companies will try to do it another -- even if this means a much less perfect "solution" in the end and many additional lives being lost because of it.

The greed of the pharmaceutical companies cannot possibly be overstated. And the control they have over research and development of medications and vaccines is enormous. If there's not a will, there's not a way. And in this case there is no will.

Part of the reason there is such an outcry for everyone to get vaccinated from the media is because high vaccination rates benefit the pharmaceutical companies.

Don't believe this is true? Pay close attention to the series of commercials in between news segments next time you tune in. You're bound to see an ad for one pharmaceutical company or another's new antidepressant, etc.

Another reason why you can be certain this is indeed a piece of the overall puzzle is that on the news there is no mention whatsoever of the risk illegal immigration poses to the proliferation of covid in this country. And illegal immigartion, mind you, is more out of control than it has ever been thanks especially to Kamala Harris, whereas everyone knows Joe Biden is not running a GD thing. Kamala was also ceremoniously tapped to handle the border crisis by Biden.

Anyway, if the media were solely intent on convincing everyone to take covid seriously and get vaccinated so that we might achieve herd immunity and save lives, they would be relentlessly hounding the "Biden" administration about this issue.

I'm pretty sure remdesivir is the only medication that has been officially approved for treating covid patients.

And to the surprise of no one, remdesivir is still under patent protection!

The following except from wikipedia's page on remdesivir is also tremendously revealing,

"According to international experts from the British Medical Journal, remdesivir 'probably has no important effect on the need for mechanical ventilation and may have little or no effect on the length of hospital stay'. Because of the high price, the authors point out that remdesivir may divert funds and efforts away from other treatments against COVID‑19.[24][25]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remdesivir

Wait, so you're telling me remdesivir is under patent and expensive? Who could have guessed?

Another great thing for the pharmaceutical companies about remdesvir is that it isn't very effective and therefore won't jeopardize vaccine profits. Aferall, if there's a highly effective treatment, there would be a lot less of a reason for everyone to get vaccinated every few years for the rest of their lives.

Remdesivir simply could not be more perfect! Under patent, expensive, and doesn't work.

And think about that quote from the wiki excerpt a little more....

International experts from one of the most highly respected medical journals in the world were asking for this ineffective and expensive drug not to be given priority over other potentially more effective treatments. Has there been any meaningful follow up in response to this? It's awfully unlikely.

To quote the democrat congresswoman representing the fifth district of Minnesota, Ilhan Omar, "it's all about the Benjamins."

However, I don't mean this with any of the same anti-semetic connotations Omar did. Not just a POC; she's also a POS.

[JBC1824]

Valpopal,

That is such an excellent point of criticism about the media's coverage.

[wh]

But it really boils down to the fact that "correlation is not causation," as vu84v2 has correctly suggested at least a few times. This is one of the most critical concepts to understanding data.

Try everything and anything, this shouldn't have anything to do with politics.

This is a bit of a rant, but I think I was able to connect a few dots....

The reason everything and anything hasn't been tried yet and very likely never will be isn't because of politics really.

It's because covid is the endless gold mine the pharmaceutical companies could never have imagined: a virus that mutates into new variants at such a rate that in all likelihood everyone will have to receive a new vaccine every couple of years. It simply couldn't be more perfect.

Thus, there is an incredibly powerful financial disincentive regarding whether to investigate existing medications (most no longer under patent, including Ivermectin) being used for other purposes as potential covid therapeutics and/or prophylactics.

If there is less or essentially no money to be made accomplishing something one way, be assured that the pharmaceutical companies will try to do it another -- even if this means a much less perfect "solution" in the end and many additional lives being lost because of it.

The greed of the pharmaceutical companies cannot possibly be overstated. And the control they have over research and development of medications and vaccines is enormous. If there's not a will, there's not a way. And in this case there is no will.

Part of the reason there is such an outcry for everyone to get vaccinated from the media is because high vaccination rates benefit the pharmaceutical companies.

Don't believe this is true? Pay close attention to the series of commercials in between news segments next time you tune in. You're bound to see an ad for one pharmaceutical company or another's new antidepressant, etc.

Another reason why you can be certain this is indeed a piece of the overall puzzle is that on the news there is no mention whatsoever of the risk illegal immigration poses to the proliferation of covid in this country. And illegal immigartion, mind you, is more out of control than it has ever been thanks especially to Kamala Harris, whereas everyone knows Joe Biden is not running a GD thing. Kamala was also ceremoniously tapped to handle the border crisis by Biden.

Anyway, if the media were solely intent on convincing everyone to take covid seriously and get vaccinated so that we might achieve herd immunity and save lives, they would be relentlessly hounding the "Biden" administration about this issue.

I'm pretty sure remdesivir is the only medication that has been officially approved for treating covid patients.

And to the surprise of no one, remdesivir is still under patent protection!

The following except from wikipedia's page on remdesivir is also tremendously revealing,

"According to international experts from the British Medical Journal, remdesivir 'probably has no important effect on the need for mechanical ventilation and may have little or no effect on the length of hospital stay'. Because of the high price, the authors point out that remdesivir may divert funds and efforts away from other treatments against COVID‑19.[24][25]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remdesivir

Wait, so you're telling me remdesivir is under patent and expensive? Who could have guessed?

Another great thing for the pharmaceutical companies about remdesvir is that it isn't very effective and therefore won't jeopardize vaccine profits. Aferall, if there's a highly effective treatment, there would be a lot less of a reason for everyone to get vaccinated every few years for the rest of their lives.

Remdesivir simply could not be more perfect! Under patent, expensive, and doesn't work.

And think about that quote from the wiki excerpt a little more....

International experts from one of the most highly respected medical journals in the world were asking for this ineffective and expensive drug not to be given priority over other potentially more effective treatments.

Has there been any meaningful follow up by the pharmaceutical companies in response to this? It's awfully unlikely. And there is of course no humane excuse for such disgusting greed and negligence.

To quote the democrat congresswoman representing the fifth district of Minnesota, Ilhan Omar, "it's all about the Benjamins."

However, I don't mean this with any of the same anti-semetic connotations Omar did. Not just a POC; she's also a POS.

I can almost feel the mental conflict overload bbtds is experiencing about now. He knows you're right, but has no choice but to reject it out of hand. I believe the pseudo sciences call it cognitive dissonance.

[JBC1824]

EXCLUSIVE: More Evidence Leaked from China on the Deliberate Release of COVID-19 by the Chinese Military

"It was specifically designed to be highly contagious, but often asymptomatic, have low lethality, but produce uncontrollable variants and possessing characteristics providing plausible deniability as a bioweapon."

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/07/report-deliberate-release-covid-19-chinese-military/

Would not be surprised.

[vu84v2]

To the several posters who seem to feel the need to incessantly flood this web site with conspiracy theories and their political ideologies: you need to get off of the Qanon and far right wing webs sites and get a life.

To any and all who may stumble across these incessant posts: these posters do not in any way represent the views of Valparaiso University and the university's community. Likewise, I and many others do not speak for the university and its community. If you are interested in Valparaiso University, please contact the appropriate sources within the university.

[bbtds]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/chris-christie-unvaccinated-people-don-t-want-to-be-indoctrinated-by-government/ar-AAMzgk5?ocid=msedgntp

Chris Christie: Unvaccinated people don't want to be 'indoctrinated' by government

The Republican said he recently spent time with a conservative friend who he said told him that he doesn't "want the government telling me what I have to do."

"These folks do not respond to be ordered to do those things. It's a sort of libertarian response to this," Christie said. "I walked him through the facts of this and he said, 'OK, I'm going to go get vaccinated.' That's what we need to do."

I say that if you die, and this is happening and will happen again and again in the future, because you needed to have it explained to you because you didn't want to be "indoctrinated by the government" you are just sad and stupid. So be it if that is the way you want to end your life.

[bbtds]

 https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/meghan-mccain-condemns-man-who-confronted-tucker-carlson/ar-AAMzPZI?ocid=msedgntp

Meghan McCain Condemns Man Who Confronted Tucker Carlson

"If you think accosting a public figure while they're shopping for fishing gear with their family on vacation is somehow accomplishing something or changing anyone's hearts or minds—you're a hypocrite and have totally lost the plot," said McCain, who is a panel member of the daytime talk show The View, in a tweet on Monday.

McCain appeared to be referencing a video from a Montana fly fishing shop that surfaced in an Instagram post on Monday that shows the poster, Dan Bailey, accusing the host of Tucker Carlson Tonight of "kill[ing]" people with vaccine misinformation and supporting "extreme racism." He also calls the Fox News host "the worst human being known to man."

In the clip, Carlson responds to Bailey quietly saying "I appreciate that" before laughing when he sees he is being recorded on camera.

How about Fox News takes Tucker Carlson off the air before more people die. No, no need to accost him on a vacation.

[wh]

To the several posters who seem to feel the need to incessantly flood this web site with conspiracy theories and their political ideologies: you need to get off of the Qanon and far right wing webs sites and get a life.

To any and all who may stumble across these incessant posts: these posters do not in any way represent the views of Valparaiso University and the university's community. Likewise, I and many others do not speak for the university and its community. If you are interested in Valparaiso University, please contact the appropriate sources within the university.

There's nothing about these posts that the 55-60% of legal voters who voted for President Trump wouldn't agree with. They are grassroots, mainstream views.

[JBC1824]

To the several posters who seem to feel the need to incessantly flood this web site with conspiracy theories and their political ideologies: you need to get off of the Qanon and far right wing webs sites and get a life.

To any and all who may stumble across these incessant posts: these posters do not in any way represent the views of Valparaiso University and the university's community. Likewise, I and many others do not speak for the university and its community. If you are interested in Valparaiso University, please contact the appropriate sources within the university.

Get a load of this guy.

Hardly ever right about anything. Always insists on saying something.

And what a typical "liberal," essentially bemoaning free speech. Just Sayin could not be more correct to point this out.

No one thinks individual posters' posts here represent the views of Valparaiso University. Give me a break.

And if you don't speak for the university and its community, stop speaking for it by making such declarations about what the posts on this forum do and do not represent from the university's perspective. 

I really don't understand the point of your little Valpo purity test. You apparently thought it was a bad idea when wh supposedly did it. Why would you then do it yourself? This is more than a little hypocritical.

Are you suggesting Just Sayin in particular is claiming to speak for the university? I must have missed where he said this. LOL.

Anyways....

Vu84v2 would apparently have us believe that my previous comments about the pharmaceutical industry are conspiracy theories.

These comments generally assert that the pharmaceutical industry does not hold people's health and welfare as its primary focus; exerts enormous corrupting influence over medical research, development, and drug approval; and that remdesivir being the only medication to have received approval by the FDA for the treatment of covid patients is itself an indicator of corruption.

So, was I right or was I wrong? Are these just conspiracy theories akin to QAnon, as vu84v2 has insinuated?

I will begin by explaining how drugs manufactured by the pharmaceutical industry are considered for approval by the FDA.

The FDA makes its decisions on whether or not to approve drugs for use in the treatment of various conditions based on the voting recommendations of advisory committees comprised of relevant experts which review evidence presented to them by pharmaceutical companies seeking approval.

Preexisting financial conflicts of interest do not necessarily exclude expert individuals from sitting on advisory committees as part of the FDA's drug approval process, and the FDA depends entirely on these individuals to personally disclose any industry ties.

There have been many documented instances of the FDA failing to note preexisting conflicts of interest for expert members of these advisory committees.

The FDA itself does no investigation whatsoever of whether participating members of the committees are forthcoming in declaring their industry ties/conflicts of interest.

Often what happens, though, is that the veneer of unbiased advisory is somewhat maintained because the experts sitting on the advisory committees will receive their industry payments only after a drug has been reviewed and received approval from the FDA. 

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/07/hidden-conflicts-pharma-payments-fda-advisers-after-drug-approvals-spark-ethical

Members of advisory committees can reasonably expect to be favored with varying forms of payments and reimbursement after giving favorable reviews of corresponding drugs to the FDA.

Indeed, evidence has been documented of "widespread" payments or research support by pharmaceutical companies to expert advisory committee members after these members have already voted in favor of the company's drugs.

The industry's financial support of an individual expert's research allows for career advancement opportunities, direct payment for his or her research efforts, and the development of greater professional influence.

These "pay-later conflicts of interest," as they are called, are not policed by the FDA and are infrequently made note of at all.

One fairly recent analysis by the peer-reviewed academic journal Science found that between 2008 and 2014, of the 107 physicians who sat on advisory committees advising the FDA on whether or not to approve 28 select drugs that a significant majority of these physicians later received payments from these drugs' developers. These payments ranged from a few thousand dollars to over a million dollars.

The European Medicines Agency (EMA), the EU's version of the FDA, does not have a policy regarding whether industry payments can be made to expert committee advisors after they have sat on a advisory committee, but the EMA at least bans participation of individuals where conflicts of interest have been found to exist prior to any potential participation.

And unlike the FDA, the EMA also conducts its own thorough investigations of potential advisors looking for preexisting conflicts of interests; it does not simply rely on these individuals for self-disclosure.

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/07/hidden-conflicts-pharma-payments-fda-advisers-after-drug-approvals-spark-ethical

Thus, the pharmaceutical industry in the United States is indeed guilty of corrupting the process of drug approval in absolute terms and when judged by a reasonable standard.

This is not where this story ends however....

Due to the Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA) passed by congress in 1992, the pharmaceutical industry also pays for 75% of the FDA's total budget for the drug review process.

This act was passed in order to expedite the drug review process in the U.S. as this process was considered at the time to be overly time-consuming when compared to that for many European countries. However, PDUFA found its additional funding for the FDA as to quicken the FDA's drug review process by enlisting the pharmaceutical industry to pay the associated costs through "new drug application fees."

As a result, when a pharmaceutical company files an application for a new drug's review by the FDA, this filing comes with a fee that ultimately serves to pay for the review process.

Therefore, all of those individuals who do some form of work as part of the FDA's drug approval process would not get paid for their work if not for industry money— creating a truly "systemic" conflict of interest.

Damningly, in a 2007 open letter sent to congress, 22 academic experts, former FDA officials, as well as others wrote that the manner in which the FDA was being funded for 75% of its total review budget by the pharmaceutical industry, "may appear to save the taxpayers money, but at an unacceptable cost to public health."

https://www.pogo.org/investigation/2016/12/fda-depends-on-industry-funding-money-comes-with-strings-attached/

What are some of the results of this clear corruption committed and paid for by the pharmaceutical industry? For one thing, Harvard University professor Mark Rodwin presented evidence in an article published in the Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics in 2013 showing that approximately 90% of the new drugs approved by the FDA over the past 30 years were essentially no more effective than drugs previously approved for the treatment of the same conditions. 

This evidently does not serve patients well in terms of health/medical expenditures whereas new drugs receiving FDA approval are placed under patent protection and therefore are automatically far more expensive than many older medications for the same conditions.

Unfortunately, the bar regarding what it takes for a drug to be considered meaningfully effective by the FDA is set similarly low for when the FDA considers whether or not a given drug is safe for consumer use.

One in five drugs approved by the FDA results in serious harm being caused to patients taking it; juxtapose this with only one in ten approved drugs providing a significant benefit compared to already existing medications.

Thus, with every new medication's approval by the FDA, the chance of this medication causing significant harm to patients is double the chance of it significantly benefiting patients.

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2298140

https://ethics.harvard.edu/blog/risky-drugs-why-fda-cannot-be-trusted

The pharmaceutical industry also routinely delays the expiration date of drug patents by only slighting modifying a drug's chemical composition, and not necessarily the therapeutic ingredients. These changes may be as insignificant as "adding a stripe" to a pill's exterior.

A 2018 study published in the Journal of Law and Biosciences showed 78% of new patents granted to drugs by the FDA over the past decade were essentially already on the market.

https://academic.oup.com/jlb/article/5/3/590/5232981

That the pharmaceutical companies would pursue extensions of patents for already existing medications in this way demonstrates industry greed; that the FDA would kowtow before the industry in this way and at such an alarming rate helps to demonstrate the extent to which the the industry has indeed corrupted the FDA.

On a related note, the pharmaceutical industry curries favor in government through its lobbying efforts. The industry tops the charts on lobbying spending with yearly contributions totaling hundreds of millions of dollars to "senior legislators in Congress involved in drafting health care laws and state committees that opposed or supported key referenda on drug pricing and regulation." These contributions include those to presidential and congressional electoral candidates campaign efforts.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7054854/

The pharmaceutical industry has had to pay tens of billions of dollars in order to settle credible allegations of hiding dangerous side effects; inappropriately promoting drugs for off-label, non-FDA approved uses; the defrauding of Medicare and Medicaid; as well as for other reasons.

Yet, this is just the "cost of doing business" for the pharmaceutical industry as their overall drug sales bring in far more money than the industry is forced to hand over in its various settlements.

https://www.citizen.org/wp-content/uploads/migration/2311.pdf

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/07/hidden-conflicts-pharma-payments-fda-advisers-after-drug-approvals-spark-ethical

Harvard University Professor of Medicine and former Editor-in-Chief of the New England Journal of Medicine Arnold Seymour Relman summed up the state of affairs regarding medicine in the United States in 2002 by making the following statement in his highly-praised critique of the pharmaceutical industry's influence,

"The medical profession is being bought by the pharmaceutical industry, not only in terms of the practice of medicine, but also in terms of teaching and research."

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1126053/#ref15

Remdesivir is the only medication that has thus far received FDA approval for treating covid patients.

The extent to which the FDA's approval process for drugs has been corrupted by the pharmaceutical industry has already been throughly established.

Is it a coincidence then that remdesivir is under patent, highly expensive and thus very lucrative, and minimally effective if not ineffective in the treatment of covid patients, which also serves to preserve the market for vaccines?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remdesivir

Are we to also conclude it is just a coincidence that Ivermectin — which is no longer under patent protection, is inexpensive, and has proven efficacy in treating covid patients — has not received FDA approval of its own?

The most significant evidence of Ivermectin's effectiveness comes from a meta-analysis reviewing dozens of randomized controlled trials (the gold standard of research) that was published in a peer-reviewed American medical journal earlier this year. 

https://journals.lww.com/americantherapeutics/fulltext/2021/08000/ivermectin_for_prevention_and_treatment_of.7.aspx

In the greater context of the rampant corrupting influence of the pharmaceutical industry, if someone believes all of these to simply be coincidences, he or she evidently needs to get a clue. I could go into far greater detail on how the pharmaceutical industry is responsible for the corruption of research and development specifically, and may still do so, but for now I rest my case.


Thus, I have asserted nothing that could could reasonably be characterized as a conspiracy theory.

So again, vu84v2 is hardly ever right about anything, but always insists on saying something.

The rate of his assertions being proven incorrect is surpassed only by that of bbtds.

[vu84v2]

To the several posters who seem to feel the need to incessantly flood this web site with conspiracy theories and their political ideologies: you need to get off of the Qanon and far right wing webs sites and get a life.

To any and all who may stumble across these incessant posts: these posters do not in any way represent the views of Valparaiso University and the university's community. Likewise, I and many others do not speak for the university and its community. If you are interested in Valparaiso University, please contact the appropriate sources within the university.

There's nothing about these posts that the 55-60% of legal voters who voted for President Trump wouldn't agree with. They are grassroots, mainstream views.

This is the type of complete BS that I was referrring to. Heck, Fox News wouldn't even report this level of BS. But regardless, you nor I speak for the university.

And as I stated before, January 20, 2025 is the first day that Donald Trump can be President again. You can state all the lies and BS that Donald Trump spews, but nothing will change that fact. I hope that you find a way to mentally cope with reality.

[bbtds]

No one thinks individual posters' posts here represent the views of Valparaiso University. Give me a break.

All I know is YOU, JBC1824, do a lot of telling people what they are exactly thinking and I don't know how you always know what everybody else is thinking and that can be a dangerous thing. I think you should stop right now or face some consequences. YOU, do not suddenly own this message board.

[vu84v2]

JBC1824 - I never said that the concerns that you raised about the pharmaceutical industry did not have some level of validity. When you consider how several drug companies were catalysts for the opioid crisis, it would be pretty hard to refute such concerns. The points originally made by FWAlum about drugs for treating people with COVID that were elaborated on by you also seem to be worth learning more about. So why should we trust the pharmaceutical companies with the vaccine? Yeah - because the difference is that their scientists and employees are putting it in their own bodies. I played golf with a rep from Pfizer (who seemed to be clearly Republican and worked out regularly with a Valpo player who transferred) and he said he would never put anything in his body that he did not feel was safe. I cannot confirm what he said (how could I?), but their employees are taking the vaccines.

Other points made in all of these posts from the three of you are conspiracy theories: 55-60% of voters voted for Trump? That is complete garbage with no supporting evidence...but it is consistent with the Trump philosophy of "if you are going to lie, just keep making the lie bigger."