The FDA, throughout my career going back to 1980, has been the world's preeminent body for ensuring safety and effectiveness of drugs and vaccines. They don't bat 100%, but have historically been more restrictive and protective of the population they serve than other countries in their demand that the drugs be proven safe and effective. There are, as a result, many drugs used in other countries that the FDA has not approved here because the FDA was not convinced (or, in some cases, because the drug company did not feel they could meet FDA standards and never sought FDA approval). Perhaps that's because they must guard against the enormous profit motive that exists in the US for drug companies to "fudge" in their effort to gain entry into the US market. (I was taught from the start to examine papers/studies giving due consideration to who did the study and who funded it, and to exercise greater scrutiny of any study run or funded by the drug company itself.)
Today we find ourselves in a bizarre world where the drug companies are self-imposing stricter standards because THEY don't trust that the FDA will be allowed to exercise its' regulatory authority free from political influence. That is unprecedented. Usually the drug companies are screaming at the FDA for being too demanding, and now they are worried that the FDA won't be demanding enough. The fact is, you cannot keep politics out of it because politics have permeated a process that was largely apolitical before COVID.
Statements like, "Canada has secured 150 million doses for a population of 38 millions" mean nothing to me. Doses of what? Under what criteria for approval and use?
Russia is already vaccinating their people with an "approved" vaccine? Do you trust it? If not, why not? China has a vaccine that's received emergency use authorization there. (
https://apnews.com/article/virus-outbreak-beijing-china-archive-f6cd7cb2bbec79234672a1b444d3b6c6) Do you trust it? If not, why not? Should we trust Canada more (or less) than Russia and China? Why or why not?
I want to trust the FDA. That's who WE have trusted for a long time. The current political situation and influence on the FDA is making it hard to do so.
Whatever direction one goes will entail a compromise from ideal.
Thus, for me, in this instance, BECAUSE of the undeniable affect and influence of politics on the US institutions designed to protect us, and the less demanding processes in other countries, I will look at the clinical papers and peer-reviewed study data and outcomes (not necessarily the conclusions) to determine if I am comfortable with a vaccine, and which vaccine. The compromise I will make is in the parenthetical above -- I will compromise my concern about studies done by or funded by the drug companies and will give them more trust than I might have otherwise done.
I think it is also important to keep one more thing in mind. There are several vaccine candidates, and they are different. They use different techniques to induce the immune response. If you jump at the first one approved you may well deny yourself the ability to use an alternative that may well be more effective, last longer, etc. We not only need to know which vaccine works, but which works best. Since I expect that several will receive EUA over a period of several months, I will certainly wait until I see the options.
