Coronavirus - Part Two.

[Annie Bynnol 612]

There is a small and growing number of healthy and young people volunteering to help all of us, by being tested on their reaction to vaccines, the virus and potential treatments regimes.

The results of these tests will produce data from which the scientists can produce vaccines and treatment programmes for people who currently cannot access them.

 

These volunteers really do put to shame those who choose to ignore or promote a negative view of the vaccination programme.

To all those who have never been thanked for their unrecognised work/extra effort/risk taking/support/kindness/smile -thank you.

[El Cid 213]

1 hour ago, Annie Bynnol said:

There is a small and growing number of healthy and young people volunteering to help all of us, by being tested on their reaction to vaccines, the virus and potential treatments regimes.

 

What are the odds of these volunteers dying due to COVID? Either its a deadly ilness and should not be allowed, or its minor and these massive fines for breaking lockdown are unjust.

[apelike 10]

1 hour ago, El Cid said:

What are the odds of these volunteers dying due to COVID?

The 90 volunteers for this trial are in the 18-30 age group and ethics approval has been given for this trial to take place. The infection fatality ratio for the 15-44 age group is around 0.03% so the chances are extremely low.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-56097088

Edited February 17, 2021 by apelike

[Annie Bynnol 612]

2 hours ago, El Cid said:

What are the odds of these volunteers dying due to COVID? Either its a deadly ilness and should not be allowed, or its minor and these massive fines for breaking lockdown are unjust.

The Volunteers are not expected to die.

They will experience different 'viral loads' and types of exposure, levels of concentration of vaccines etc.

It will help to answer you question as to whether "... its a deadly ilness and should not be allowed, or its minor(illness)..."

 

A "...deadly ilness..." is an illness which kills a significant number and harms many others. 

A "...minor..." illness is one that is unlikely to kill or severely harm  somebody by itself. 

These are the extremes with all transmittable illnesses falling somewhere in between.

In the case of  Covid the virus causes a huge range of variation in response in different groups.

 

"Lockdown" has been used for thousands of years because it was known that isolation reduced the spread of infectious diseases.

Deserted islands, transportation, ghettos, murder, starvation and prisons have all been used to prevent the spread of infection.

By the last century we used hospital and the law to enforce isolation.

Now we are so nice we educate and inform which works for the vast majority.

Sometimes and for whatever excuse, fines are used to remind a tiny minority what they need to do for other people.

Some criminals make huge amounts of money and are justly given massive fines for encouraging others in breaking lockdown.

 

 

 

[El Cid 213]

2 hours ago, apelike said:

The 90 volunteers for this trial are in the 18-30 age group and ethics approval has been given for this trial to take place. The infection fatality ratio for the 15-44 age group is around 0.03% so the chances are extremely low.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-56097088

If the rate was 1%, that would be 1 death per 100

So a rate of 0.03% is 3 deaths per 10,000

For £4,500  would you risk it?  I wouldnt want my family to risk death at those odds.

[petemcewan 27]

El Cid

God bless  the volunteers.

But it's not ethical to pay them.

Financial inducement taints the ability of the volunteer to objectively evaluate the risk to which they are being exposed.

Compensation for their time, is a prudent choice of words.

Edited February 18, 2021 by petemcewan

[MuteWitness 10]

2 hours ago, petemcewan said:

El Cid

God bless  the volunteers.

But it's not ethical to pay them.

Financial inducement taints the ability of the volunteer to objectively evaluate the risk to which they are being exposed.

Compensation for their time, is a prudent choice of words.

Drug companies pay loads of people in medical trials, what makes this any different ? 

[El Cid 213]

The chance of death?

[Thirsty Relic 208]

I see parallels in the blood scandal in the US, where people were paid to give blood.  Many poor down and outs were quite happy to give blood and get cash.  It was only when many diseases were found in this blood  that had been used to help others that alarm bells began to ring....

 

Perhaps enhanced health and life insurance for those in the trial is the answer.  No financial assistance now, but massive cover for them and their dependents should anything go wrong.

[apelike 10]

1 hour ago, Thirsty Relic said:

I see parallels in the blood scandal in the US, where people were paid to give blood.  Many poor down and outs were quite happy to give blood and get cash.  It was only when many diseases were found in this blood  that had been used to help others that alarm bells began to ring....

 

Perhaps enhanced health and life insurance for those in the trial is the answer.  No financial assistance now, but massive cover for them and their dependents should anything go wrong.

It's nothing like paying people to give blood and I can't see how you can form parallels with the blood scandal in the USA because of it. Me thinks that too much media hype has been made of this and people are too willing to believe it. It has been clearly stated that any money the volunteers receive will not be paid up front in one lump sum and is to reimburse them for the time taken over the course of a year to do this trial.

 

From the BBC link:

 

"Volunteers will be compensated for their time, to the tune of around £4,500 over the course of a year, which will include follow-up tests."

 

We should be thanking these people for being unselfish and taking the time to do this for our benefit and not berating them for getting paid a small sum for their time.

 

1 hour ago, El Cid said:

The chance of death?

Already answered that one but just to reiterate, with a sample of 90 healthy people..... almost zero and hard to define other than that.

[Arnold_Lane 0]

7 minutes ago, apelike said:

It's nothing like paying people to give blood and I can't see how you can form parallels with the blood scandal in the USA because of it. Me thinks that too much media hype has been made of this and people are too willing to believe it. It has been clearly stated that any money the volunteers receive will not be paid up front in one lump sum and is to reimburse them for the time taken over the course of a year to do this trial.

 

From the BBC link:

 

"Volunteers will be compensated for their time, to the tune of around £4,500 over the course of a year, which will include follow-up tests."

 

We should be thanking these people for being unselfish and taking the time to do this for our benefit and not berating them for getting paid a small sum for their time.

 

Already answered that one but just to reiterate, with a sample of 90 healthy people..... almost zero and hard to define other than that.

A better analogy would have been Ford’s swine flu vaccination response in 1976.

[apelike 10]

23 minutes ago, Arnold_Lane said:

A better analogy would have been Ford’s swine flu vaccination response in 1976.

To be honest it's the first time I have heard or read about it so thanks for the heads up on that.

 

In case others need to know a bit about it then here is a link from the BBC:

 

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200918-the-fiasco-of-the-us-swine-flu-affair-of-1976