https://www.factcheck.org/2021/04/scicheck-the-facts-on-the-recommended-jj-vaccine-pause-in-u-s
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/17/health/covid-convalescent-plasma.html
At the beginning of the pandemic, there was a misinformed belief that injecting someone with the plasma of a patient who has recovered from COVID-19 would help immunize someone against COVID-19 - a treatment long-used by physicians in the absence of other treatments during pandemics, like in the 1918 Spanish flu. This was a belief that the Trump administration as well as some medical institutions latched onto when there wasn’t much hope in solving the issue of treatment, though that belief quickly turned out to not be substantiated by enough evidence and those same institutions quietly abandoned the idea.
Most of the hype surrounding plasma could be chalked up to lack of options, as many local hospitals were undersupplied and had government-sponsored plasma readily available, and pressure from the Trump administration for a “cure” early on in the pandemic (one might remember the hydroxychloroquine incident). The latter led the FDA to approve the use of plasma on COVID-19 patience for a long while during the first half of the pandemic, despite the lack of evidence for its effectiveness.
Though, the investment in the idea is nothing to sneeze at - 722,000 units of plasma were distributed to medical institutions during the plasma boom, and many individuals donated a large portion of their own plasma. Experts theorize there could be an assortment of different reasons that plasma wasn’t as effective as first thought - large sample sizes, using plasma only on patients that couldn’t produce their own antibodies later in the pandemic, etc.
Ultimately, just like the issues with single-dose vaccines, experts say that the plasma boom showcases scientific theory in motion in COVID-19 treatment and inoculation, medical knowledge shifting and changing to new information.
Relation to Econ: So the Trump administration made a bad investment in plasma that did not pay off, mostly based off convoluted medical information, and probably exacerbated the pandemic issues because they invested in plasma and not useful medical supplies for hospitals.
Questions:
1. Do you believe that the lack of effect in hospitals for plasma was affected by environmental conditions? Explain.
3 comments:
I do believe that the lack of effect from plasma injections were affected by the conditions of the pandemic. The two possible reasons other than science seem to be legitimate confounding variables. One, the large sample size could mean that plasma could only work for a small percentage of people (effects of COVID on people vary tremendously, as do the disease variants). So just like our data with case rate, death rate, previous-conditions rates, the sample size is integral in how we determine conclusions. Second, using the plasma on patients who couldn’t produce antibodies seems like using the plasma is a last resort to an already badly-recovering population of test-subjects. If they can’t recover, supported by their own immune system, it seems unlikely that a small transfer of plasma would carry over significant effects from another’s immune system. To answer the question of the bad investment, I don’t blame the Trump administration for spending too much money on ultimately an unsuccessful plasma ploy. What I do blame them is on not spending enough money on the vaccines as they were being developed. In this matter of national security and health, spending money on possible solutions (like plasma grounded in reality) should be the goal. Save lives by exhausting legitimate possibilities.
During the beginning of the pandemic, it probably affected the plasma shot's lack of effect. For starters, at the beginning of the pandemic, we probably did not understand the virus as we do now, so if it was tried again now, there was higher chance that it succeeds. Additionally, as mentioned the sample size just shows that if the sample size is large enough and it still doesn't work, either something is off about the method of experimenting or the plasma just doesn't work yet. Even though it was unsuccessful, this made sense, as Trump just wanted the pandemic to end, and it would have made him look like a saint. It was also good for the scientific community, showing growth and development.
I think it’s fair to say that Trump’s administration did handle the pandemic poorly—with the lack of enforcement, the constant politicization of health-related precautions, and not treating the pandemic with the seriousness it was due, they definitely contributed to the exacerbation of issues that might have been avoided if tackled earlier on. However, at the beginning of the pandemic, everyone, including the science community was scrambling to find answers. Because of the instability and insecurity, I think scientists and many officials did what they thought was most rational, which included investing in anything that seemed even remotely promising. For lack of a better term, there was increased “demand” for solutions due to the urgency fostered by the pandemic. In hindsight, yes, the investment into plasma did not pay off when looking at current research, but I think the true error, as Danny noted, was the lack of further investment by the administration into other alternatives and preventative or protective measures.
Post a Comment