I think you're missing the bigger picture. What if someone in the future wants to develop a new and better vaccine for a disease like measles? Or let's say polio. Or malaria. For well-researched and serious diseases, placebo-controlled trials are unethical because the placebo group would not receive a known effective intervention. In cases of diseases that cause serious illness or death, when existing interventions are available, the use of a placebo is typically considered unethical, and it is preferred to test the investigational agent against the standard of care. This is going to make vaccine development much more difficult because it won't even be ethically possible to do this type of study for some diseases. It's an underhanded way of trying to stymie vaccine research and development under the guise of sounding scientific. |
Jynneos is an example of an approved vaccine where a DB, placebo control was not performed. Effectiveness was inferred through innovative trial design by comparing to the smallpox vax. For some reason, there seems to be a block in posting vaccine related links, but Health Affairs studied pivotal trials for all vaccines approved from 2006 up to around 2020. Nearly half of the pivotal trials performed did not use placebo, but an active control. Sure, it doesn't mean the vaccines were approved in which a DB, placebo control was not used, but that is likely due to lack of effectiveness and not simply because they didn't run placebo. The point is that it's simply not true all pivotal trials for vaccines use placebo controls. By requiring a DB, placebo control, there may be future vaccines for terrible diseases that are now much more difficult to develop. It also curtails innovative trial design, like that used to support the approval of Jynneos, for exmaple. |
This. I guess it's too much to expect that people seek out the most basic understanding of how it actually works. |
And that's a good thing. Surely by now people realize that the flu vaccine doesn't work... |
It's hilarious to see the first page full of "that's unethical" then the "we already do that" crew takes over ... |
How when this would not pass any IRB? He has proposed something inherently illegal. |
It's actually both. Unethical to go back and retest vaccines known to be safe using a placebo. Also a waste of my tax dollars, frankly. |
The worm won |
The reason you can’t ethically run a vaccine trial against an inactive placebo is that we already have proven vaccines so doing so would be massively unethical. You would be intentionally depriving the placebo group of proven prevention. That has been deemed impossibly unethical since the Tuskegee trial in the 20th centuries. Exactly who would you like to see receive no prevention for preventable conditions in said trials? |
Do you want to DM so I can share links for double blinds for vax testing with you? |
Are you adding to the PP? Or did you massively miss their sarcastic poke? |
You're kidding, right? If not, then relieved that my children are now old enough that they will never be exposed to you in a classroom setting. |
I'm guessing you got your whole family flu shots every year, got the flu and excused it as a bad match that year right? |
It's almost like more than one person is posting. Weird. Hey, do you think you could get RFKJ to advocate for randomized controlled trials for the "drugs and vitamins" he's proposing to treat measles, because that evidence sure isn't there. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/rfk-jr-cdc-measles-treatment-guidance/?ftag=CNM-00-10aab7e&linkId=809744998 |
This Season's Flu Vaccines Reduced Flu Medical Visits and Hospitalizations Across All Ages (2024, as the flu season 2025 just finished and the data is still being compiled) https://www.cdc.gov/flu/whats-new/2023-2024-vaccines-reduce-medical-visits.html Aw shucks, don't make no difference if you feel poorly for a few days versus getting hospitalized with that there pneumonia, amirite? |