All those outspoken doctors weren’t wrong after all. You know, the ones that have been crying out for caring for mild-to-moderate COVID-19 patients at early onset of the infection. From Dr. Peter McCullough to Dr. Pierre Kory with the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC) and many more, physicians have pleaded that the current approach to COVID-19 has been unethical and immoral. Why? Because 90% of COVID-19 patients fall into the category of either asymptomatic or mild-to-moderate symptoms, and the standard of care has been to send such patients home with no care and simple instructions to come back to the health center if the symptoms begin to worsen. That’s because healthcare and political leadership decided to emphasize first, massive spend on both vaccines and novel experimental therapeutics as evidenced in America by the National Institute of Health (NIH) and its partnership with the pharmaceutical industry via the ACTIV (Accelerating COVID-19 Therapeutic Interventions and Vaccines) program, which emphasized vaccines and novel therapeutic research from the start, frankly skipping 90% of the cases. Of course, TrialSite’s been chronicling this dynamic along with the research into ivermectin, fluvoxamine and other repurposed drugs that could possibly make a difference for the vast majority of early onset cases. But an underlying driving force here is the massive market that this 90% population represents—that, is a pill for 90% of the COVID-19 cases worldwide. That’s over 140 million, and in the rich GDP economies, literally tens of billions of dollars per annum is at stake for any company that owns market share. Some suspect the government research policy choices served as a way to protect this space for industry. That’s why there has been such resistance to the ivermectin clinical trials data, argue some. But now the Anglosphere embraces the race to find the early onset home care treatment as in the UK, and across the pond in America, societal forces move to address this crisis by opening up this market. As TrialSite reported on in early April, in the UK Boris Johnson now launches an ‘antiviral taskforce’ with the ambitious aim that Britons can take a pill for COVID-19 care home by autumn. Ministers seeks at least two (2) economical treatments for home use by later this year.
Anglosphere Waking Up to Early Care
While on the other side of the pond, America’s NIH recently announced a major ACTIV program targeting early onset treatment, TrialSite suggested ivermectin would represent one of the program’s regimens according to government insiders. This would represent a change as TrialSite pointed out months ago America’s apex research institute has overwhelmingly emphasized the experiment into vaccine and novel therapeutics.
But what about here in the UK? Now the government launches an antivirals task force in a mad quest to find drugs for the pervasive number of home cases, and fast. As if they stepped into the shoes of the front line care givers several months later, healthcare and political leadership now present that at home treatments must be the focus for the 90% or so of the COVID-19 cases so as to reduce disease progression and reduce the need for hospital beds in the process the press here declares. Of course, the rumblings around England are that the Health Secretary, while making everyone feel like vaccines were the only answer months ago, was in the private life hedging the healthcare bet personally with some generic precaution.
And while mass vaccination programs were never meant to solve the problem alone, earlier in the pandemic any discussion of cheap generics raised the eyebrows of many, and even from time to time triggered a good scolding about the importance of vaccination. The mass media helped encourage a sort of mass group think.
Of course, the healthcare authorities have always known vaccines aren’t enough to help society transcend the crisis. For example, TrialSite reported that NIH’s ACTIV program included England’s own AstraZeneca and its pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) and post-exposure prophylactics (PEP) experimental long-acting antibody regimen known as AZD7442. The study description made it clear—the formula to eradicate COVID-19 includes both vaccines and therapies. That’s right—while at the same time AstraZeneca was receiving government funding to develop the COVID-19 vaccine, it also received U.S. public money to develop a potential PrEP treatment.
Now in England, staffed by a diverse pool of people from relevant sectors (government, academic researchers and scientists and pharma industry insiders), the panel, of course, is supposed to be neutral and unbiased. Will it embrace the movement toward cheap generics such as ivermectin and fluvoxamine along with exotic novel concoctions?
Vaccination Doesn’t Eradicate
This recent recognition within the Anglosphere reveals the unfortunate reality that healthcare and political leaders know what many scientists and researchers have known from nearly the start: we will have to live with this pathogen for a long time. And as such, standards of care and protocols for immediately treating people represent a mission critical healthcare imperative.
A key influencer here, Sir Patrick Vallance, the nation’s chief scientific advisor suggested recently, “Antivirals in tablet form are another key tool for the response.” Hence the importance of assembling a team of scientists to find early onset treatment pathways, declared Boris Johnson recently. The British leader declared that people in the UK must “learn to live with this disease, as we live with other diseases.”
Avoid Bias If Possible
The recent Daily Mail entry declared that while no drugs were formerly selected, the government was in talks with numerous pharmaceutical companies in regards to “promising” antivirals under development, and “officials are keen to get new drugs that aren’t already used.”
This antivirals task force should embrace both promising experimental drugs and some of the generic drugs known to have some impact, from ivermectin to fluvoxamine, favipiravir and others. Finding safe and effective treatments that help inhibit disease progression, cut down the duration of illness, and hence minimize transmission represents the next chapter in the war on COVID-19 in the human struggle back to normalcy. The process for selecting task force participants, ensuring a diverse representation of interests are key in a democratic market society. As is a holistic perspective, it is important to ensure that low cost generic options are thoroughly, appropriately and accurately tested alongside branded competition. Yes, billions of dollars are tempting and healthy competitive wealth generation drives economies but the vital imperative of proper public health reigns supreme here.