Another day, another miracle cure.
This weeks entry, convalescent plasma.
Trump and Azar claim that it reduces mortality rates by 35%. Except we have no proof that it does, and the actual EUA doesn’t state that either. When the Mayo clinic tested it in June, the 7 day morality rate (number of people who died within a 7 day window) dropped to 8.6 % compared to 12%. This was, however, not a true test. There was no control group to compare. The study was just designed to be a set-up for actual randomized, controlled experiments.
Even if this treatment works, 3ish% is a far cry from “35”. Skipping the clinical trial phase is bad form. You may think that this all would amount to a real world trial…but there are major flaws with that line of thinking. I’ve struggled to articulate why mass treatments based on limited data is so damaging in a way that is easy for laymen to understand, but thankfully a dude from Oxford summed it up.
“The biggest problem with an EUA for convalescent plasma therapy is that we will not know if it works, as the EUA essentially causes clinicians to give the treatment rather than entering patients in clinical trials. There may also be a rationing problem as it may be in short supply.” Dr. Duncan Young.
And
“Bottom line for EUA is this: if you end up hospitalized, your doctor won’t know if plasma is helpful or not. That’s why we do science. And EUA sets us back. Makes it harder to do science right.” Ashish Jha, director of the Harvard Global Health Institute.
Science does not work like Ork tec. Just because you wish it so, does not make it so.