Medical Discussion of Coronavirus

[bovie]

“Houston Methodist Hospital on Tuesday suspended 178 employees without pay for 14 days for failing to comply with its COVID-19 vaccine requirement.”

Facing termination in two weeks. 27 have one dose.

(...sound of tort lawyers rushing to Houston...)

[HikingDO]

“Houston Methodist Hospital on Tuesday suspended 178 employees without pay for 14 days for failing to comply with its COVID-19 vaccine requirement.”

Facing termination in two weeks. 27 have one dose.

I see 178 lawsuits heading their way.....

[PedsCCM]

As contentious as this is, I'm sure there will be a lot of lawsuits in general. But why is this different than flu or MMR? Aside from specific, protected exemptions, employees have been required to get these (or show titers or proof of vaccination for MMR) at my last 4 hospitals. My current health system and university have announced vaccine requirements for the fall - again consistent with their policies for other vaccine preventable diseases.

[CordMcNally]

As contentious as this is, I'm sure there will be a lot of lawsuits in general. But why is this different than flu or MMR? Aside from specific, protected exemptions, employees have been required to get these (or show titers or proof of vaccination for MMR) at my last 4 hospitals. My current health system and university have announced vaccine requirements for the fall - again consistent with their policies for other vaccine preventable diseases.

Requiring a vaccination that only has emergency authorization and not full FDA approval will likely be a big part of the suit.

[PedsCCM]

Requiring a vaccination that only has emergency authorization and not full FDA approval will likely be a big part of the suit.

Super reasonable. I’ve been really surprised at how quick some of the policies have been implemented. I honestly expected them to wait for full approval first. I’m curious to see how much the frustration and litigious response changes when the full approval comes.

[CordMcNally]

Super reasonable. I’ve been really surprised at how quick some of the policies have been implemented. I honestly expected them to wait for full approval first. I’m curious to see how much the frustration and litigious response changes when the full approval comes.

It seems like a strange move for the hospital to require it when both Pfizer and Moderna have both applied for FDA approval. I honestly don’t know how long it takes to get approval. I anticipate hospitals will require it (with the typical exemptions) like other vaccines once that happens but requiring it now just seems like they’re begging for lawsuits.

[Shant]

I don't see how this is a successful lawsuit. Isn't Texas an employment at-will state?

[Craigslist]

I'm officially announcing the coronavirus pandemic over.

[Lordosis]

Now for some reason I thought the Pfizer vaccine got full approval recently. I must have made that up or misread some other but of news.

Have they announced a timeline?

[Tim]

I don't see how this is a successful lawsuit. Isn't Texas an employment at-will state?

One lawsuit was filed about a month ago. No following it by any means. Primary claim is forced participation in experimental drug trials. Think Nuremberg. About 111 plaintiffs, I believe mostly nurses. I believe CDC/FDA has already issued some guidance.
May will doesn’t mean you can compel something illegal. There is not going to be “Nuremberg Trials” coming out of this. You are free, work someplace else. Methodist set this up extremely well, communicated and has the deep pockets and connections to make this move.

[Tim]

https://rcm.imrpress.com/article/2020/2153-8174/RCM2020264.shtml

hydroxychloroquine, in specific. Not asking for a political judgement, but is the above scientifically and medically valid for legitimate consideration?

My fear is the “military/industrial complex” that Eisenhower warned about now includes medicine. Even medical journals and groups of medical scientists seem to have had reputations damaged.
Disclosure: the above us published by an physician that has opposed Fauci at many points. My question is it legitimate. Really long and over my head.

[Rando]

https://rcm.imrpress.com/article/202...M2020264.shtml

hydroxychloroquine, in specific. Not asking for a political judgement, but is the above scientifically and medically valid for legitimate consideration?

My fear is the “military/industrial complex” that Eisenhower warned about now includes medicine. Even medical journals and groups of medical scientists seem to have had reputations damaged.
Disclosure: the above us published by an physician that has opposed Fauci at many points. My question is it legitimate. Really long and over my head.

This has come up in the thread before. The trouble I see with these early outpatient meds is that given the disease probably has a fatality rate of <1% you have to have a huge study in order to prove statistical significance in outcomes.. That was probably impractical in almost all cases. I did not go into the studies in this article but I'd guess they are mostly not what we'd consider a large scale controlled study.

It's hard to talk about hydroxychloroquine without politics. I'll say up front I'm not convinced it does anything. The first mentions of its use were anecdotal, but at the time anecdotal was all we had. I had patients that were given HCQ in the hospital, my guess being the hospitalists felt like they needed to do something even with lack of evidence. What happened then is one "side" became wildly optimistic about HCQ while the other side (including most of the dominant media) became wildly pessimistic. I remember a commentator I have a great deal of respect for shouting "this medicine can kill you"! My state medical board forbid its use in COVID. So instead of cautious optimism and the usual "need for further study", a lot of people went off the deep end and poisoned the issue. I would like to see a good study done on it.

Conceptually it would be great to have something to give early to reduce mortality and morbidity but in my mind the evidence isn't there yet. And realistically there's not a lot of money to be made in studying generic drugs, and I haven't seen much push from the government to fund such a study.

[CordMcNally]

This has come up in the thread before. The trouble I see with these early outpatient meds is that given the disease probably has a fatality rate of <1% you have to have a huge study in order to prove statistical significance in outcomes.. That was probably impractical in almost all cases. I did not go into the studies in this article but I'd guess they are mostly not what we'd consider a large scale controlled study.

It's hard to talk about hydroxychloroquine without politics. I'll say up front I'm not convinced it does anything. The first mentions of its use were anecdotal, but at the time anecdotal was all we had. I had patients that were given HCQ in the hospital, my guess being the hospitalists felt like they needed to do something even with lack of evidence. What happened then is one "side" became wildly optimistic about HCQ while the other side (including most of the dominant media) became wildly pessimistic. I remember a commentator I have a great deal of respect for shouting "this medicine can kill you"! My state medical board forbid its use in COVID. So instead of cautious optimism and the usual "need for further study", a lot of people went off the deep end and poisoned the issue. I would like to see a good study done on it.

Conceptually it would be great to have something to give early to reduce mortality and morbidity but in my mind the evidence isn't there yet. And realistically there's not a lot of money to be made in studying generic drugs, and I haven't seen much push from the government to fund such a study.

Didn't the manufacturer of HCQ come out and say that it should not be used as a treatment for COVID? I mean, when someone who can profit from its use comes out and warns against it is a pretty telling sign, especially in the pharmaceutical industry.

[Tim]

Didn't the manufacturer of HCQ come out and say that it should not be used as a treatment for COVID? I mean, when someone who can profit from its use comes out and warns against it is a pretty telling sign, especially in the pharmaceutical industry.

Not political, this was more alone the lines that "subsequent studies" have been done and politics (whether favorable/unfavorable) were aligned for not based on science.
Influence dispensed as fact rather than as caution. Much of what is now coming out as "tainted". I doubt we will ever get a true picture. Fauci made a statement that any criticism of him it an attack on science! A lot of disinformation out there. It is impossible to tell. A lot of theories out there still distorted and sincere medical fact based opinions being shut off. Time will tell (or not). Not interested in the politics, they have caused enough anxiety.

[Sampter]

“The Death of Expertise” is an excellent book that everyone should read (including experts). I re-read recently in the context of Covid.

Bush II was right, the president is the “decider”. Fauci/NIH/CDC are providing guidance, the president decides what to do with it.