Here's an interesting stat, more Americans have died this year of Covid19 than died in 2020. This despite the fact that a vaccine has been available for the whole time.
And some more anecdotal info: Both my brother and father tested positive for Covid last week. Mild flu-like symptoms for both. My Dad is 80, a full blown diabetic, and has had two heart bypass surgeries. He's on the mend and doing fine.
I was reading that Allen West who is running for Governor in Texas and has in been on the national political scene for awhile now, has Covid. He is unvaccinated and proud of it. He commented on Twitter.. I can attest that, after this experience, I am even more dedicated to fighting against vaccine mandates. Instead of enriching the pockets of Big Pharma and corrupt bureaucrats and politicians, we should be advocating the monoclonal antibody infusion therapy," West tweeted. So according to him the vaccine is a money grab by big pharma, but big pharma who also makes the monoclonal antibody infusion drugs, must be doing those for free, right?
I would have to look at the bare cost of either option, but one requires many hundreds of millions of doses, vs. hundreds of thousands of doses... Is the relative cost / benefit of prophylactic treatment better or worse than targeted treatment? Is the answer to that question universal, or does it depend on one's own risk profile? Does it also depend on whether an individual has developed natural immunity an can depend on treatment if a future variant is more dangerous? It would be nice if we could have a full discussion about this, rather than identifying with a "side" and not being objective about the full spectrum of options.
Agree...but you could also look at the question of how much benefit there is to society as a whole and not just to each individual case and risk profile. I realize that that sounds a bit Orwellian and I cringe writing it...but truth be told there are MANY freedoms that we all give up all the time for the greater good. And I also realize that, unlike polio, smallpox, and measles we are probably NOT going to eliminate or almost eliminate this virus. But if we could prevent tens of thousands of deaths of the most vulnerable of us....
Cost of Monoclonal Antibody infusion: The cost of Regeneron’s two-drug cocktail is $1,250 per infusion, according to Kaiser Health News. The federal government currently covers this. Compare this to the cost of a single dose of the COVID-19 vaccine — about $20 — which is also covered right now by the federal government. The cost of GSK’s and Vir’s monoclonal antibody costs about $2,100 per infusion. This is covered by a combination of government payments, reimbursements, and GSK’s copay program, reports USA Today. However, some infusion centers may charge treatment fees. These are covered by Medicare, Medicaid, and most private health insurances, although some plans may charge a copay. If you’re uninsured or concerned about cost, ask the treatment center beforehand if you’ll be charged for the infusion.
Valid point Stu. I am glad the opportunity exists for the vulnerable among us to be vaccinated. Too bad half the government is so intent on making decisions for the other half that the choice has become either get vaccinated or lose your job. What other freedoms should we willingly give up to save 10,000s of lives in a country of 400,000,000? Forced chemo, anyone?
We’ll we can go to court and mandate that a Jehova’s Witness child be given to save the child’s life. If they want not to have one on their own case and risk their own life then that is their right. There are those who would disagree with forced treatment of their child as stomping on parental rights but I would lean the other way. You could fall on either side of that fence and have a valid point.
200,000,000 dosed individual, each with 2 vaccine doses, at $20 each: $8B 400,000 monoclonal infusions, at $1200 - $2100 each: $480M - $840M 8,000,000,000 / 840,000,000 is about 10x 8,000,000,000 / 480,000,000 is about 20x Not sure what the disagree is for?
I don't like that argument at all, it seems that your point is that it's cheaper to treat them after they get covid. If so then I doubt if you like this number. 42.5M Covid Cases in the US, treat them with infusions instead of emphasizing/mandating prevention, at avg cost of 1650$ =70,125,000,000$ spent on infusions. Then add in the hospital costs for those who don't respond because their infections are too severe, I'll bet you get to 100B number pretty quickly.
Who are most folks? Those infusions work best early when you first get a positive result, they don't use them once the disease progresses to the next level. They question would be if everyone who tested positive received the infusion ASAP, how big of an impact would it have? That's what Allen West is implying, F the vaccine just get the infusion.
Like most crisis in this country, covid has brought out the best and worst of the American people. Families have been divided over their personal stances on the vaccine. Business has been brought to its knees and we've manufactured a supply chain crisis that could be the biggest threat to the economy in the last 100 years.
Merck asking for EUA for a pill that helps treat Covid patients. It's a good thing no doubt, and easier to administer than the infusions. While I'm still very much in favor of everyone getting the vaccine, that clearly isn't going to happen so something like this that helps to treat/fight Covid infections. Something that if you test positive you can start and right away and get something that you can pickup at the pharmacy and start treatment. Merck said it is asking for authorization for the capsules to treat infected adults who are at risk of progressing to severe Covid-19 disease or hospitalization. Its submission is based on a study that was stopped at the interim point because the drug was working so well in more than 700 patients randomly assigned to take either molnupiravir or a placebo. Merck seeks FDA emergency use authorization for experimental antiviral Covid-19 treatment molnupiravir - CNN
Yes, Terry, that was part of the point, thank you. We've discussed before that a VAST majority of cases do NOT need any kind of treatment. However, we are marching toward forcing people to inject a chemical into their body against their will because we, the majority, have determined it is the best thing for them. Purely comparing the two approaches, universal (actually only calculated for 50% vaccinated above) vaccination vs. treating those that would need the treatment due to trending toward a severe case / hospitalization shows a pretty strong case that we have two viable alternative treatment plans, one of which is demonstrably 10x - 20x cheaper when applied to those severe cases. However, only those that are vaccine hesitant have their God-given rights removed because the whole discussion has become so political. When did it become acceptable to criminalize a different opinion, even a bad opinion in the eyes of some? I, too, fully support doing everything to provide FACTUAL information to help people make the best preventative choice that can be made. In the end, the choice is up to the individual, probably with THEIR doctor's advice, not a political mob coming at them with a needle attached to a chemical concoction. T, I love everyone in this SB family, very much including you. For THIS relative risk, I would still not strap you down and put a chemical in your body that you vehemently opposed needing, even if I believed it had the potential to save your life. I would beg you and negotiate with you if I felt you were making a bad choice, but the decision ultimately should be up to you.
Appreciate you, Kes...but that's pretty inflammatory rhetoric. We need to do our best to bring factual information to people...fight those who are being trolls (not you...talking about the 5G tracking and magnet morons, who, much to my disgust are physicians)...and keep the rhetoric down. I do not like mandates but believe that we need to do our best to convince people that the vaccine is well tested and MUCH safer than getting the damn virus...and if you add up ALL the costs of getting and treating the disease (not just the cost of the monoclonal infusion itself) I would bet that the vaccine is the cheaper way to go...and most effective way of saving lives. As far as costs go...$20 a vaccine is a small price to pay compared to the absolute havoc that this virus (and our reactions to it) are doing to our economy. I am big on individual freedoms...but I just do NOT understand why so many folks (most of them of the same political and philosophical bent as myself) are drawing THIS particular line in the sand. It just doesn't make sense to me.
Well I'm not sure how this will work but Gov Abbott has banned vaccine mandates in Texas. I'm sure somebody will go to court over this. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) issued an executive order yesterday that banned COVID-19 vaccine requirements across the board, including for employees and customers of private businesses. Under the order, “no entity” can require the vaccination of anyone who “objects to such vaccination for any reason of personal conscience, based on a religious belief, or for medical reasons, including prior recovery from COVID-19.” The vaccine “should remain voluntary and never forced,” Abbott argued, even as he admitted that the shot “is safe, effective, and our best defense against the virus.”