Connect with us

Government

Medicine is an imperfect science – but you can still trust its process

A critical care doctor brings a frontlines perspective to the frustration of dealing firsthand with vaccine hesitancy and discusses the limitations of science and medicine.

Published

on

Intensive care physicians are yet again facing ICU bed and staff shortages as severe COVID-19 cases rise. gorodenkoff/iStock via Getty Images Plus

The Conversation is running a series of dispatches from clinicians and researchers operating on the front lines of the coronavirus pandemic. You can find all of the stories here.

As an intensive care physician in Southern California who endured the onslaught of COVID-19 in 2020, it has been deeply disheartening to experience chillingly familiar scenes all over again. The ICUs in the University of California San Diego Health hospital network where I work are again overflowing – especially with patients who need ventilators. Families peer through tinted hospital windows for glimpses of loved ones. And hospital administrators scramble to keep up with necessary staffing and beds to accommodate the influx of patients.

What is so vexing is that COVID-19 is still the culprit, despite the availability of highly effective vaccines that slashed U.S. COVID-19 daily case numbers and hospitalizations within months. The vaccines also allowed economies to begin to recover and provided a way for people to experience some sense of normalcy again.

In early spring, the efficacy of the vaccine engendered hope that herd immunity – in which infectious viral spread is prevented through a high proportion of the population’s being immune to the disease – could be within reach in months. Instead, pandemic panic is again suffocating us, largely because a large part of the public still shuns vaccination – with only 62% of the eligible U.S. population fully vaccinated as of early September 2021.

I wanted an answer to the obvious question: Why?

Straight from the source

So I turned to my patients for answers. At the bedside in their hospital rooms, I first asked about how they were feeling and performed detailed exams before addressing the elephant in the room. “Did you receive the COVID-19 vaccine?” And if not, I gently asked, “Did you have a specific reason you could share with me, so I can understand better?”

Somewhat surprisingly, patients candidly told me their reasons for avoiding the vaccine.

A common response I heard was that it was simply inconvenient. “I was too lazy and I didn’t get around to it,” some admitted, looking away sheepishly as they did so. Curiously, they did not consider the myriad “inconveniences” of becoming infected, such as medical complications – including death – and associated costs for treatment, lost work, dependence on others for basic necessities such as child care, the risk of infecting family members, the potential for developing long-haul COVID-19 and more.

Others expressed a fervid distrust of vaccine-testing methods, stating that people had been “guinea pigs in past vaccine experiments that later caused autism.” Yet more than 25 studies in the past 20-odd years have disproved any causal link between vaccines and autism.

Some felt that the forceful public messaging to get vaccinated belied true motivations of the authorities, adding: “I mean, why are they pushing this so hard? Something must be wrong with it.” Yet few question the strong public health stance on healthy eating practices and exercise, or wearing seat belts while driving.

Still others feared the possibility of life-threatening side effects: “Thousands had heart attacks from the vaccine – it’s all on the CDC website,” they told me. So I took a close look at the CDC website to understand their claims better.

Reports of heart inflammation occurred in 699 cases out of 177 million vaccinated people, or 0.0004%, with causal links to the vaccines still being investigated. Development of blood clots causally associated with the Johnson & Johnson vaccine are also extremely rare, occurring in 28 cases out of 8.73 million doses given as of May 7, 2021 – a rate of 0.0003%. This extremely low risk of blood clots is still significantly lower than the risk of blood clots from an actual COVID-19 infection.

Medicine as art and imperfect science

In some cases, political affiliation can partially explain vaccine antipathy. But my patients’ responses highlighted two other themes to me.

First, people often forget that medicine is an art based on applied science, not a deductive science based on irrefutable forces in nature like gravity. Patients and families often ask me in the ICU to predict what will happen to loved ones unequivocally, only to be disappointed when I avoid speaking in certainties.

An ICU doctor hugs and comforts a patient in a COVID-19 ICU
Having to deliver devastating news and uncertainties about patient outcomes has taken a heavy toll on ICU physicians during the COVID-19 pandemic. Go Nakamura/Getty Images News

Once viewed as omniscient authorities, doctors now openly acknowledge that limitations of medical data require scrutiny and careful application to particular circumstances. COVID-19 has reinforced our appreciation that there are no perfect cures or 100% guarantees of success. Rather, medicine is governed by what is probable. What are the chances I still may have cancer if the test result returns negative? Am I more or less likely to survive pneumonia by taking this specific antibiotic?

Doctors must then engage in thoughtful analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of scientific methods and data to optimize and tailor our recommendations for individual patients – without the luxury of perfect or even complete datasets to rely on. The vaccine has clearly been shown – its rare side effects notwithstanding – to provide an overwhelmingly high likelihood of benefit over potential risks to almost all individuals. This includes people who have been previously infected with COVID-19. Yet the unvaccinated continue to fixate on rare side effects to justify skipping the shot.

Vaccines are medicines too

Many of my patients also seem to view vaccines and other public health-based recommendations like offers to buy a used car – with skepticism and independence, threatening to walk away at any moment. Doing one’s part to stop the spread of disease is a culturally nuanced civic virtue, like safe driving, which transcends absolute autonomy. In the U.S., most drivers willingly do not drive while intoxicated, cross lanes without warning or block other cars that are trying to merge. These are norms that make driving in the U.S. relatively efficient, safe and even pleasant compared with some other countries.

The path to herd immunity, like highway safety, requires majority participation without immediate guarantees of complete personal freedom. Vaccines succeed not because they are 100% risk-free to the individual but because collective efforts focus on achieving the common good.

Oddly, at the same time that my patients rejected the vaccine, they showed strong interest in receiving other types of medicine “shots” like monoclonal antibodies – which mimic natural antibodies – or anti-inflammatory medications. While some of these treatments have demonstrated benefits in certain situations – others have not. And some present the risk of very serious harm.

I reminded my patients that the COVID-19 vaccine stimulates a person’s own immune system to make antibodies that can neutralize the virus and that surpass the capabilities of commercially created antibody formulations. So the vaccines help prevent infection and development of serious illness from COVID-19 in the first place. People who experience the rare breakthrough infections following vaccination generally have a shorter and milder course of COVID-19 infection and are far less likely to end up hospitalized than those who are unvaccinated. Vaccines also confer longer-term protection, whereas the other medications are used reactively – when a serious infection has already begun – and those medications have shorter-term results.

How past vaccination efforts succeeded

In the past, many vaccines that successfully vanquished societal outbreaks of polio, measles and mumps are now routinely administered in childhood with minimal objection, despite the fact that there is no such thing as zero risk.

As I continue to have conversations with patients who suffer greatly from COVID-19 illness as a direct consequence of having avoided the vaccine, my own pain – for being an ineffective healer and witness to such loss – is inexorable. Overcoming this fourth wave of COVID-19 still feels out of reach until our vaccination efforts can somehow better emphasize the effectiveness of vaccines, even when scientifically imperfect, and prioritize civic health care responsibilities over pure autonomy. If not, I fear that our battle against COVID-19 will rage on.

[Get the best of The Conversation, every weekend. Sign up for our weekly newsletter.]

Venktesh Ramnath does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Read More

Continue Reading

Government

Are Voters Recoiling Against Disorder?

Are Voters Recoiling Against Disorder?

Authored by Michael Barone via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The headlines coming out of the Super…

Published

on

Are Voters Recoiling Against Disorder?

Authored by Michael Barone via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The headlines coming out of the Super Tuesday primaries have got it right. Barring cataclysmic changes, Donald Trump and Joe Biden will be the Republican and Democratic nominees for president in 2024.

(Left) President Joe Biden delivers remarks on canceling student debt at Culver City Julian Dixon Library in Culver City, Calif., on Feb. 21, 2024. (Right) Republican presidential candidate and former U.S. President Donald Trump stands on stage during a campaign event at Big League Dreams Las Vegas in Las Vegas, Nev., on Jan. 27, 2024. (Mario Tama/Getty Images; David Becker/Getty Images)

With Nikki Haley’s withdrawal, there will be no more significantly contested primaries or caucuses—the earliest both parties’ races have been over since something like the current primary-dominated system was put in place in 1972.

The primary results have spotlighted some of both nominees’ weaknesses.

Donald Trump lost high-income, high-educated constituencies, including the entire metro area—aka the Swamp. Many but by no means all Haley votes there were cast by Biden Democrats. Mr. Trump can’t afford to lose too many of the others in target states like Pennsylvania and Michigan.

Majorities and large minorities of voters in overwhelmingly Latino counties in Texas’s Rio Grande Valley and some in Houston voted against Joe Biden, and even more against Senate nominee Rep. Colin Allred (D-Texas).

Returns from Hispanic precincts in New Hampshire and Massachusetts show the same thing. Mr. Biden can’t afford to lose too many Latino votes in target states like Arizona and Georgia.

When Mr. Trump rode down that escalator in 2015, commentators assumed he’d repel Latinos. Instead, Latino voters nationally, and especially the closest eyewitnesses of Biden’s open-border policy, have been trending heavily Republican.

High-income liberal Democrats may sport lawn signs proclaiming, “In this house, we believe ... no human is illegal.” The logical consequence of that belief is an open border. But modest-income folks in border counties know that flows of illegal immigrants result in disorder, disease, and crime.

There is plenty of impatience with increased disorder in election returns below the presidential level. Consider Los Angeles County, America’s largest county, with nearly 10 million people, more people than 40 of the 50 states. It voted 71 percent for Mr. Biden in 2020.

Current returns show county District Attorney George Gascon winning only 21 percent of the vote in the nonpartisan primary. He’ll apparently face Republican Nathan Hochman, a critic of his liberal policies, in November.

Gascon, elected after the May 2020 death of counterfeit-passing suspect George Floyd in Minneapolis, is one of many county prosecutors supported by billionaire George Soros. His policies include not charging juveniles as adults, not seeking higher penalties for gang membership or use of firearms, and bringing fewer misdemeanor cases.

The predictable result has been increased car thefts, burglaries, and personal robberies. Some 120 assistant district attorneys have left the office, and there’s a backlog of 10,000 unprosecuted cases.

More than a dozen other Soros-backed and similarly liberal prosecutors have faced strong opposition or have left office.

St. Louis prosecutor Kim Gardner resigned last May amid lawsuits seeking her removal, Milwaukee’s John Chisholm retired in January, and Baltimore’s Marilyn Mosby was defeated in July 2022 and convicted of perjury in September 2023. Last November, Loudoun County, Virginia, voters (62 percent Biden) ousted liberal Buta Biberaj, who declined to prosecute a transgender student for assault, and in June 2022 voters in San Francisco (85 percent Biden) recalled famed radical Chesa Boudin.

Similarly, this Tuesday, voters in San Francisco passed ballot measures strengthening police powers and requiring treatment of drug-addicted welfare recipients.

In retrospect, it appears the Floyd video, appearing after three months of COVID-19 confinement, sparked a frenzied, even crazed reaction, especially among the highly educated and articulate. One fatal incident was seen as proof that America’s “systemic racism” was worse than ever and that police forces should be defunded and perhaps abolished.

2020 was “the year America went crazy,” I wrote in January 2021, a year in which police funding was actually cut by Democrats in New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Seattle, and Denver. A year in which young New York Times (NYT) staffers claimed they were endangered by the publication of Sen. Tom Cotton’s (R-Ark.) opinion article advocating calling in military forces if necessary to stop rioting, as had been done in Detroit in 1967 and Los Angeles in 1992. A craven NYT publisher even fired the editorial page editor for running the article.

Evidence of visible and tangible discontent with increasing violence and its consequences—barren and locked shelves in Manhattan chain drugstores, skyrocketing carjackings in Washington, D.C.—is as unmistakable in polls and election results as it is in daily life in large metropolitan areas. Maybe 2024 will turn out to be the year even liberal America stopped acting crazy.

Chaos and disorder work against incumbents, as they did in 1968 when Democrats saw their party’s popular vote fall from 61 percent to 43 percent.

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times or ZeroHedge.

Tyler Durden Sat, 03/09/2024 - 23:20

Read More

Continue Reading

Government

Veterans Affairs Kept COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate In Place Without Evidence

Veterans Affairs Kept COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate In Place Without Evidence

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The…

Published

on

Veterans Affairs Kept COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate In Place Without Evidence

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) reviewed no data when deciding in 2023 to keep its COVID-19 vaccine mandate in place.

Doses of a COVID-19 vaccine in Washington in a file image. (Jacquelyn Martin/Pool/AFP via Getty Images)

VA Secretary Denis McDonough said on May 1, 2023, that the end of many other federal mandates “will not impact current policies at the Department of Veterans Affairs.”

He said the mandate was remaining for VA health care personnel “to ensure the safety of veterans and our colleagues.”

Mr. McDonough did not cite any studies or other data. A VA spokesperson declined to provide any data that was reviewed when deciding not to rescind the mandate. The Epoch Times submitted a Freedom of Information Act for “all documents outlining which data was relied upon when establishing the mandate when deciding to keep the mandate in place.”

The agency searched for such data and did not find any.

The VA does not even attempt to justify its policies with science, because it can’t,” Leslie Manookian, president and founder of the Health Freedom Defense Fund, told The Epoch Times.

“The VA just trusts that the process and cost of challenging its unfounded policies is so onerous, most people are dissuaded from even trying,” she added.

The VA’s mandate remains in place to this day.

The VA’s website claims that vaccines “help protect you from getting severe illness” and “offer good protection against most COVID-19 variants,” pointing in part to observational data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) that estimate the vaccines provide poor protection against symptomatic infection and transient shielding against hospitalization.

There have also been increasing concerns among outside scientists about confirmed side effects like heart inflammation—the VA hid a safety signal it detected for the inflammation—and possible side effects such as tinnitus, which shift the benefit-risk calculus.

President Joe Biden imposed a slate of COVID-19 vaccine mandates in 2021. The VA was the first federal agency to implement a mandate.

President Biden rescinded the mandates in May 2023, citing a drop in COVID-19 cases and hospitalizations. His administration maintains the choice to require vaccines was the right one and saved lives.

“Our administration’s vaccination requirements helped ensure the safety of workers in critical workforces including those in the healthcare and education sectors, protecting themselves and the populations they serve, and strengthening their ability to provide services without disruptions to operations,” the White House said.

Some experts said requiring vaccination meant many younger people were forced to get a vaccine despite the risks potentially outweighing the benefits, leaving fewer doses for older adults.

By mandating the vaccines to younger people and those with natural immunity from having had COVID, older people in the U.S. and other countries did not have access to them, and many people might have died because of that,” Martin Kulldorff, a professor of medicine on leave from Harvard Medical School, told The Epoch Times previously.

The VA was one of just a handful of agencies to keep its mandate in place following the removal of many federal mandates.

“At this time, the vaccine requirement will remain in effect for VA health care personnel, including VA psychologists, pharmacists, social workers, nursing assistants, physical therapists, respiratory therapists, peer specialists, medical support assistants, engineers, housekeepers, and other clinical, administrative, and infrastructure support employees,” Mr. McDonough wrote to VA employees at the time.

This also includes VA volunteers and contractors. Effectively, this means that any Veterans Health Administration (VHA) employee, volunteer, or contractor who works in VHA facilities, visits VHA facilities, or provides direct care to those we serve will still be subject to the vaccine requirement at this time,” he said. “We continue to monitor and discuss this requirement, and we will provide more information about the vaccination requirements for VA health care employees soon. As always, we will process requests for vaccination exceptions in accordance with applicable laws, regulations, and policies.”

The version of the shots cleared in the fall of 2022, and available through the fall of 2023, did not have any clinical trial data supporting them.

A new version was approved in the fall of 2023 because there were indications that the shots not only offered temporary protection but also that the level of protection was lower than what was observed during earlier stages of the pandemic.

Ms. Manookian, whose group has challenged several of the federal mandates, said that the mandate “illustrates the dangers of the administrative state and how these federal agencies have become a law unto themselves.”

Tyler Durden Sat, 03/09/2024 - 22:10

Read More

Continue Reading

Government

Low Iron Levels In Blood Could Trigger Long COVID: Study

Low Iron Levels In Blood Could Trigger Long COVID: Study

Authored by Amie Dahnke via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

People with inadequate…

Published

on

Low Iron Levels In Blood Could Trigger Long COVID: Study

Authored by Amie Dahnke via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

People with inadequate iron levels in their blood due to a COVID-19 infection could be at greater risk of long COVID.

(Shutterstock)

A new study indicates that problems with iron levels in the bloodstream likely trigger chronic inflammation and other conditions associated with the post-COVID phenomenon. The findings, published on March 1 in Nature Immunology, could offer new ways to treat or prevent the condition.

Long COVID Patients Have Low Iron Levels

Researchers at the University of Cambridge pinpointed low iron as a potential link to long-COVID symptoms thanks to a study they initiated shortly after the start of the pandemic. They recruited people who tested positive for the virus to provide blood samples for analysis over a year, which allowed the researchers to look for post-infection changes in the blood. The researchers looked at 214 samples and found that 45 percent of patients reported symptoms of long COVID that lasted between three and 10 months.

In analyzing the blood samples, the research team noticed that people experiencing long COVID had low iron levels, contributing to anemia and low red blood cell production, just two weeks after they were diagnosed with COVID-19. This was true for patients regardless of age, sex, or the initial severity of their infection.

According to one of the study co-authors, the removal of iron from the bloodstream is a natural process and defense mechanism of the body.

But it can jeopardize a person’s recovery.

When the body has an infection, it responds by removing iron from the bloodstream. This protects us from potentially lethal bacteria that capture the iron in the bloodstream and grow rapidly. It’s an evolutionary response that redistributes iron in the body, and the blood plasma becomes an iron desert,” University of Oxford professor Hal Drakesmith said in a press release. “However, if this goes on for a long time, there is less iron for red blood cells, so oxygen is transported less efficiently affecting metabolism and energy production, and for white blood cells, which need iron to work properly. The protective mechanism ends up becoming a problem.”

The research team believes that consistently low iron levels could explain why individuals with long COVID continue to experience fatigue and difficulty exercising. As such, the researchers suggested iron supplementation to help regulate and prevent the often debilitating symptoms associated with long COVID.

It isn’t necessarily the case that individuals don’t have enough iron in their body, it’s just that it’s trapped in the wrong place,” Aimee Hanson, a postdoctoral researcher at the University of Cambridge who worked on the study, said in the press release. “What we need is a way to remobilize the iron and pull it back into the bloodstream, where it becomes more useful to the red blood cells.”

The research team pointed out that iron supplementation isn’t always straightforward. Achieving the right level of iron varies from person to person. Too much iron can cause stomach issues, ranging from constipation, nausea, and abdominal pain to gastritis and gastric lesions.

1 in 5 Still Affected by Long COVID

COVID-19 has affected nearly 40 percent of Americans, with one in five of those still suffering from symptoms of long COVID, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Long COVID is marked by health issues that continue at least four weeks after an individual was initially diagnosed with COVID-19. Symptoms can last for days, weeks, months, or years and may include fatigue, cough or chest pain, headache, brain fog, depression or anxiety, digestive issues, and joint or muscle pain.

Tyler Durden Sat, 03/09/2024 - 12:50

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending