Coming February 6, 2024 . . .
MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE
by Michael Wolraich
Pre-order at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop
Coming February 6, 2024 . . . MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE by Michael Wolraich Pre-order at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop |
....aside from the safety issues, the two predominant obstacles to having a widespread cure revolve around ethical and economical questions.
For the ethical side, it all comes down to human testing. Paul Hunger, professor of Health Protection at the University of East Anglia, broke down both arguments for the Huffington Post:
As a practicing clinician, if I was given the option to help people with a drug that isn't proven, but has been shown to have at least some effect, it's unethical not to give it to them.
[But] in the midst of such a huge epidemic, one could even argue that doing a blind controlled trial would be unethical, because if you give a placebo to some people, who will most likely die, then you are depriving them of a drug that could cure them, something that could save their life.
The economical side is more, well, deplorable, according to Dr. Stephen Morse, an epidemiologist at Columbia University's Mailman School of Public Health. "The vaccine companies of course have to be driven by the economic considerations," he told the Huffington Post. "It's a terrible thing to say, but they have to be convinced that it's economically... worthwhile to provide the vaccine."
Comments
The article has a misleading title. Then the writer goes on to list some of the work that has been done in researching a cure. I am thinking the whole time reading it, "wow" they have made some break through on RNA replication and L-proteins. The problem lies in the lack of willingness to put money into health research. This kind of research don't create much profit for investors so it is up to our government to bankroll the lab geeks.
It is much more useful to scare the public into panic, that is how the power hungry stays in power.
Fringe groups are pounding the drum that Central American Refugees will bring in Ebola and spread it around. Throw more jello at the wall and see if it sticks.
by trkingmomoe on Sat, 08/02/2014 - 2:32pm
Sure, the headline is click bait. Worked, didn't it.
From what I've read authors don't write their own headlines. The article does explain that Ebola is a virus and explains how they are always mutating but does not emphasize it as much as I would have liked. The rapidly evolving nature of viruses is why containment/quarantine in the early stages of an epidemic and possible pandemic is so important. More so even than an intense effort to find a drug or vaccine to treat or prevent infection. Lethal strains of viruses that kill their hosts die with them while less deadly strains that remain with the few survivors sometimes confer a vaccine-like immunity that can possibly be used and/or copied. That possibility is being tested in one of the Ebola victims arriving in Atlanta today.
How is snarking about idiots who are fearful of Ebola arriving with Central American Refugees in response to a post about the very real admittance of Ebola victims from West Africa any more useful than they are?
by EmmaZahn on Sat, 08/02/2014 - 3:34pm
Another strong argument on the pessimistic side, Emma:
by artappraiser on Fri, 08/15/2014 - 9:35pm
Oh, Jesus...Laurie Garrett knows her shit. Even before reading the article, I'm reaching for the bleach.
by jollyroger on Sat, 08/16/2014 - 1:53am