NationStates

San Lumen wrote:

Grenartia wrote:
Would you trust ground beef if the USDA inspections for it were rushed and half-assed, especially if said cornercutting was explicitly intended to get more product on the shelves with no regard for the consequences?

Sometimes corners should be cut for the greater good.

Major fucking yikes from me, fam.

We can't drag our feet for weeks on this.

We can if rushing it would cause people to not trust the safety of it. Which it absolutely would. People mistrusting a vaccine enough to not get it is objectively worse than a lack of vaccine supply, and that fact should go without saying.

This is not the same as what you suggested.

It really is the same.

Grenartia wrote:

San Lumen wrote:
Sometimes corners should be cut for the greater good.

Major fucking yikes from me, fam.

We can't drag our feet for weeks on this.

We can if rushing it would cause people to not trust the safety of it. Which it absolutely would. People mistrusting a vaccine enough to not get it is objectively worse than a lack of vaccine supply, and that fact should go without saying.

This is not the same as what you suggested.

It really is the same.

We already approved the vaccine why would rushing the approval the plant undermine trust?

San Lumen wrote:

Washington Resistance Army wrote:
Cutting corners on medicine is an atrocious idea, wtf.

The vaccine is already approved. Just approve the plant without any delay.

1. Doing that would be the opposite of a good look.

2. Gotta make sure the factory isn't fucking up the production of the vaccine.

Grenartia wrote:

San Lumen wrote:
The vaccine is already approved. Just approve the plant without any delay.

1. Doing that would be the opposite of a good look.

2. Gotta make sure the factory isn't fucking up the production of the vaccine.

So just do it and dont make it take weeks.

San Lumen wrote:

Grenartia wrote:
1. Doing that would be the opposite of a good look.

2. Gotta make sure the factory isn't fucking up the production of the vaccine.

So just do it and dont make it take weeks.

This isn't Mao's 5 year plan of 1956 for gods' sake.

Austria-Bohemia-Hungary wrote:

San Lumen wrote:
So just do it and dont make it take weeks.

This isn't Mao's 5 year plan of 1956 for gods' sake.

But if they don't then live theater and live sport might die a permanent death.

San Lumen wrote:

Grenartia wrote:
1. Doing that would be the opposite of a good look.

2. Gotta make sure the factory isn't fucking up the production of the vaccine.

So just do it and dont make it take weeks.

Brilliant fucking idea! Why were you the only person to think of that?

Like, seriously, do you honestly think its that fucking easy?

Did you forget that incident a few years back when some medicine was tainted with some kind of fungus and a bunch of people got an entirely new form of meningitis because of it?

Grenartia wrote:

San Lumen wrote:
So just do it and dont make it take weeks.

Brilliant fucking idea! Why were you the only person to think of that?

Like, seriously, do you honestly think its that fucking easy?

Did you forget that incident a few years back when some medicine was tainted with some kind of fungus and a bunch of people got an entirely new form of meningitis because of it?

It could be. We could have determined small trials were good enough or approved it faster and rushed out the vaccine and this pandemic would be over with by now.

I never heard of that incident.

San Lumen wrote:

Grenartia wrote:
1. Doing that would be the opposite of a good look.

2. Gotta make sure the factory isn't fucking up the production of the vaccine.

So just do it and dont make it take weeks.

we don't have the fucking flash on hand
making sure production is safe takes time and effort

San Lumen wrote:

Grenartia wrote:
Brilliant fucking idea! Why were you the only person to think of that?

Like, seriously, do you honestly think its that fucking easy?

Did you forget that incident a few years back when some medicine was tainted with some kind of fungus and a bunch of people got an entirely new form of meningitis because of it?

It could be. We could have determined small trials were good enough or approved it faster and rushed out the vaccine and this pandemic would be over with by now.

I never heard of that incident.

Sacrificing lives at the altar of live theater. Disgusting.

Kowani wrote:

San Lumen wrote:
So just do it and dont make it take weeks.

we don't have the fucking flash on hand
making sure production is safe takes time and effort

Why would a company have unsafe production? Its not in their interest to do so. Speed up the approval process.

San Lumen wrote:

Kowani wrote:we don't have the fucking flash on hand
making sure production is safe takes time and effort

Why would a company have unsafe production? Its not in their interest to do so. Speed up the approval process.

Holy fuck this is such an ignorant take lol. The only reason companies don't have unsafe production is because we force them not to and take time to verify it's not. We learned in the Gilded Age that business would cut every corner, even if it literally killed people, in the name of profit.

Vassenor wrote:

San Lumen wrote:
It could be. We could have determined small trials were good enough or approved it faster and rushed out the vaccine and this pandemic would be over with by now.

I never heard of that incident.

Sacrificing lives at the altar of live theater. Disgusting.

I said nothing of the sort.

San Lumen wrote:

Grenartia wrote:
Brilliant fucking idea! Why were you the only person to think of that?

Like, seriously, do you honestly think its that fucking easy?

Did you forget that incident a few years back when some medicine was tainted with some kind of fungus and a bunch of people got an entirely new form of meningitis because of it?

It could be. We could have determined small trials were good enough or approved it faster and rushed out the vaccine and this pandemic would be over with by now.

No it wouldn't, and the cut corners would mean not only a less effective vaccine *cough* Sinovac *cough*, but also a less safe one. And you'd see a massive backlash against the vaccines because of that. Which would, again, be objectively worse than no vaccine at all. I get that you're privileged and just dying to go back to brunch and pretend like you've gone back in time and none of this ever happened, but people in the real world aren't willing to sacrifice our wellbeing 'for the economy'. The genie is out of the bottle, and you're going to have to accept that. This is the new normal, and there's no going back.

I never heard of that incident.

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

Grenartia wrote:

San Lumen wrote:
It could be. We could have determined small trials were good enough or approved it faster and rushed out the vaccine and this pandemic would be over with by now.

No it wouldn't, and the cut corners would mean not only a less effective vaccine *cough* Sinovac *cough*, but also a less safe one. And you'd see a massive backlash against the vaccines because of that. Which would, again, be objectively worse than no vaccine at all. I get that you're privileged and just dying to go back to brunch and pretend like you've gone back in time and none of this ever happened, but people in the real world aren't willing to sacrifice our wellbeing 'for the economy'. The genie is out of the bottle, and you're going to have to accept that. This is the new normal, and there's no going back.

I never heard of that incident.

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

Why would it mean less effective?

San Lumen wrote:

Kowani wrote:we don't have the fucking flash on hand
making sure production is safe takes time and effort

Why would a company have unsafe production? Its not in their interest to do so. Speed up the approval process.

When did you become an ancap?

San Lumen wrote:

Vassenor wrote:
Sacrificing lives at the altar of live theater. Disgusting.

I said nothing of the sort.

You don't have to say it to imply it.

San Lumen wrote:Why would it mean less effective?

Because the inevitable result of cutting corners is a decrease in quality.

This is basic stuff, man, I can't believe this has to be explained to you, you're clearly capable of operating a computer, you should already know this!

Grenartia wrote:

San Lumen wrote:
Why would a company have unsafe production? Its not in their interest to do so. Speed up the approval process.

When did you become an ancap?

San Lumen wrote:
I said nothing of the sort.

You don't have to say it to imply it.

San Lumen wrote:Why would it mean less effective?

Because the inevitable result of cutting corners is a decrease in quality.

This is basic stuff, man, I can't believe this has to be explained to you, you're clearly capable of operating a computer, you should already know this!

Why would determining it works well in small groups and approving it mean its less effective? we could have avoided variants and this would be over with

San Lumen wrote:

Grenartia wrote:
When did you become an ancap?



You don't have to say it to imply it.



Because the inevitable result of cutting corners is a decrease in quality.

This is basic stuff, man, I can't believe this has to be explained to you, you're clearly capable of operating a computer, you should already know this!

Why would determining it works well in small groups and approving it mean its less effective? we could have avoided variants and this would be over with

Omfg no we couldn't have avoided variants with any of your plans. If anything they'd be worse because you've opposed any sort of action from the get-go and we've seen how well that worked in Brazil.

San Lumen wrote:Why would determining it works well in small groups and approving it mean its less effective?

Because small sample sizes cannot be accurately generalized to the larger population.

we could have avoided variants and this would be over with

That's not how any of this works.

God, this entire exchange is all the evidence needed to show how sorry a state of affairs scientific literacy is in this country.

San Lumen wrote:

Kowani wrote:Johnson & Johnson vaccine distribution to slow down 84% next week

Just as the Biden administration is moving up its deadline to make vaccine eligibility available to all adults by April 19, the supply of at least one of the vaccines, Johnson & Johnson's, is slowing down, and with some of its manufacturing challenges at an independent plant that has had problems in the past, it's unclear exactly when it will pick back up again.

Next week, the number of Johnson & Johnson COVID-19 vaccines allocated to states and other jurisdictions by the federal government is expected to drop 84%, according to a CNN analysis of data from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In contrast, the supply of Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna vaccines remain steady for next week. J&J would not directly answer CNN's questions about why the supply has slowed down, but Jeff Zients, the White House COVID-19 response coordinator said at a briefing Friday, that the supply to states won't change until its independent manufacturing plant gets a green light from the FDA.

"Johnson and Johnson expects a relatively low level of weekly dose delivery, until the company secures FDA authorization," Zients said.

why are they having so many problems? Why not just green light it immediately? No delays

per the article, the problem seems to lie with J&J trying to get Baltimore's Emergent BioSolutions approved as a manufacturer of the Janssen vaccine.

The company has been trying to add additional manufacturing capacity in the US, but it has had problems with one of those manufacturers, Baltimore-based Emergent BioSolutions. In June, Emergent signed a $628 million contract with the Trump administration's Operation Warp Speed to manufacture COVID-19 vaccines. It has worked with AstraZeneca and J&J. So far though, it hasn't been authorized by the US Food and Drug Administration to produce any vaccines.

According to a FDA inspection report obtained by CNN, Emergent has had some, what the FDA calls "observations," the agency doesn't call them violations, with their manufacturing processes in the past.

Compliance expert, John Avellanet, the Managing Director of Cerulean Associates, LLC said the fact that Emergent got what's known in the industry as a 483 report from the FDA is "significant."

"Only something in the neighborhood of 15% or less of FDA inspections end in non-compliance observations on a Form FDA 483, so when one gets a 483, it is significant." Avellanet said in an email to CNN.

J&J told CNN Thursday that it is working closely with the FDA so it get the official sign off from the FDA to use the facility.

"There's a lot of vaccine in the queue if you will, to ultimately make it out to the people that need it assuming the FDA approves the EUA" a source familiar with Emergent's manufacturing process said.

As far as when that will happen, it's unclear. The FDA said it cannot comment on any particular company or its manufacturing.

San Lumen wrote:

Grenartia wrote:
Would you trust ground beef if the USDA inspections for it were rushed and half-assed, especially if said cornercutting was explicitly intended to get more product on the shelves with no regard for the consequences?

Sometimes corners should be cut for the greater good. We can't drag our feet for weeks on this. This is not the same as what you suggested.

Is it in the interest of the greater good to cause greater harm by cutting corners?

Washington Resistance Army wrote:

San Lumen wrote:
Why would determining it works well in small groups and approving it mean its less effective? we could have avoided variants and this would be over with

Omfg no we couldn't have avoided variants with any of your plans. If anything they'd be worse because you've opposed any sort of action from the get-go and we've seen how well that worked in Brazil.

why would it be worse?

San Lumen wrote:

Grenartia wrote:
Would you trust ground beef if the USDA inspections for it were rushed and half-assed, especially if said cornercutting was explicitly intended to get more product on the shelves with no regard for the consequences?

Sometimes corners should be cut for the greater good. We can't drag our feet for weeks on this. This is not the same as what you suggested.

God this is such an antihuman take.

People will be somewhat reluctant to accept a vaccine, or any of them in general, if you've got people getting nasty reactions and potentially dying left and right because an improperly vetted manufacturer screwed up with their production.

And then there's the people who are actually getting the nasty reactions and the deaths, which would have been preventable if said corners hadn't been cut.

San Lumen wrote:

Grenartia wrote:
1. Doing that would be the opposite of a good look.

2. Gotta make sure the factory isn't fucking up the production of the vaccine.

So just do it and dont make it take weeks.

Lumen, March 2020: Why don't we just end the pandemic now?