There was a time when the United States launched a crash program to get to the Moon, and it captured the hearts and minds of the population. In 2020, the federal government launched a crash program entitled “Operation Warp Speed,” to produce a safe vaccine against COVID-19 as rapidly as possible. When it became clear that several vaccine candidates could finish their Phase 3 clinical trials before the end of the year, the horrifying (to some) thought arose that a deployable vaccine, and its accompanying well-needed outbreak of optimism prior to the Nov. 3 election, would interfere with the removal of President Donald Trump. As Pfizer’s Phase 3 trials, begun on July 27, indicated on Sept. 3 that they were on track for delivering excellent results no later than mid-October, Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS) kicked in. With reckless disregard for human life, a gang went after the Food and Drug Administration and Pfizer to push vaccine approval back two extra months. This gang could have, or should have known, that they had traded no fewer than 12,000 lives for their political agenda, and possibly many more.
The first deployment of the vaccine was to the medical frontline and to those in care facilities. So, how many deaths would come from seniors in care facilities, deprived of a vaccine between mid-October and mid-December? Here’s a rough thumbnail estimate. According to CDC accounting, about 20% of the COVID-19 deaths have occurred in care facilities. (This calculation doesn’t even count those patients who caught the virus, but made it to a hospital before they died.) It is likely that 1,000-2,000/day will die of COVID-19 during this time period, and 20% of those, the ones that we know could have been vaccinated, will die. That is 200-400/day, or over those 60 days, 12-24,000, will die. This rough estimation takes no account of others who would have also received the vaccine during those first two months.
The precise requirement of an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) is that it is designed to temper normal scientific standards with emergency social concerns. It is farcical to object to an EUA that it takes into account social emergencies. Egged on by New York Times and Washington Post warnings of a Trump “October Surprise,” one Dr. Eric Topol, a cardiologist at California’s Scripps Research Institute with a big Twitter following, swung into action. Topol has been the media’s go-to guy for months for “authoritative” medical objections to Trump’s program. His argument has been that, if it is fast — that is, a crash program — it is suspect; and no one need pay attention to the “emergency” part of the EUA. In September, Topol led a campaign accusing FDA head Stephen Hahn of being a tool of Trump in the push for a vaccine, and calling upon him to resign. This led to a series of phone calls between Topol and Hahn, which Topol describes as rather chummy: “I went from way negative to way positive.” He now calls Hahn a “friend,” who has had to withstand tremendous pressure from Trump and Azar. Hahn consented to a change in policy in mid-to-late September, whereby any vaccine EUA approval would be delayed for an extra two months after the successful assessment of the Phase 3 trial.
