[ad_1]
ISn as a clinical trial doctor, I’ll tell you what I do for most of the ten years generally spent developing a vaccine, which is very little.
It is not laziness. All the while I offer grants, which are turned down. I propose them again, I wait for the answer, I propose them again elsewhere, all this in an endless process. When I have a chance to get trial funding, I spend the next few months appearing before ethics committees. I await the regulatory approval, I manage the personnel changes within the pharmaceutical company and the “change of direction” of my trials. Eventually, when the odds turn in my favor, I start organizing the rehearsals, finding the sites where they take place, and I panic because the recruiting is bad. Then I look for other sites …
Usually my problems are mostly regulatory, and eventually, if I’m really lucky, my tests will end in viable therapy – or not. At this point, the vaccine may be delayed due to cost issues or other obstacles. Not to mention the years normally required to conduct “preclinical” studies, those that precede human trials.
Taking ten years is a bad sign
Next time you meet someone who expresses concern about the astonishing speed of current trials, point out that taking ten years is a bad sign. Those ten years are not used to make sure the vaccine is safe, they are years of fighting indifference, commercial imperatives and bureaucracy.
These obstacles in the process are “easy” to overcome. All you need are unlimited funds, a few smart and highly motivated people, all the global testing infrastructure, a near-limitless bank of selfless volunteers, and a few sane regulators.
Source link
