Hit me with your best shot

Hit me with your best shot
Come on!
Hit me with your best shot
Fire away

~~ "Hit Me With Your Best Shot" by Pat Benatar

Be Best

No, I'm not kidding. I want your best shot. 

It seems that the Idiot-In-Chief and self-proclaimed genius epidemiologist (he's really good at that stuff, y'all) has decided that we're going to have a vaccine against the Coronavirus that causes COVID-19 by the end of 2020. Amazingly, some scientists are all on board and going along with that timetable, although the vast majority think that is way too optimistic. 

Count me among the latter. 

I never was part of vaccine development but I studied a bit about it and spent my entire career in healthcare. One thing I did do as part of my job was testing new methods against old methods. I.e., when a new test was developed and became available and we thought we might want to switch to it, we ran duplicate tests comparing it to our current test. We needed to make sure it compared well and that the results were shown to be accurate before we adopted the new method. 

Let me tell you...that was involved and tedious enough. With vaccine development, we're talking a whole other level of complexity. Formulating a vaccine itself isn't going to be extremely difficult; it's the subsequent testing that it must endure that takes time and large numbers of tests. The main goals are to find something that is both safe and effective. This does not happen overnight or with the snap of an artificially orange tiny finger. 

That's why I am so dubious of a safe vaccine by year's end. And you know what? If there is a vaccine, and they actually manage to manufacture it in the large doses needed, I will not be getting it immediately, and Ken most certainly will not. You all know how I am about vaccines. They save lives. That is not debatable, although many try. (They are wrong.) I know the truth of it. But I also know the consequences of a rushed vaccine that has not been entirely vetted. Some vaccines have carried the increased risk of Guillain-Barré syndrome (the swine flu vaccine in the '70s) and some, like the first incarnation of the Rotavirus vaccine, resulted in a rare but serious condition called intussusception, which is an intestinal complication that can result in blockage and the need for surgical intervention. (That vaccine was pulled from use and another one was developed.)

To summon an Internet meme, one does not simply walk into a safe vaccine. It requires development, in vitro testing, in vivo testing in animals, and then in vivo testing in humans. The level of antibody development needs to be determined as well as how long those antibodies last, which will determine if it will confer immunity for a matter of years or only of months. Follow-up testing needs to be done to see if any long-term issues arise. 

It might not be rocket science but it's pretty damn complex in a different way. 

Rushing a vaccine to market for mass consumption is a dangerous prospect. I trust nothing that comes from the mouths of political operatives. I trust the science. If the orange idiot starts talking up this vaccine and I don't hear scientists agreeing, I will run the other way from that vaccine. 

***

Time to make the vaccines

On a related note, I watched the testimony before Congress from Dr. Rick Bright, the whistleblower who said that his warnings about the urgency of this virus went unheeded. (Quote of the Year: "We're in deep shit.") I was dismayed to see many of the Republican congresscritters trying to shield the so-called "president" when it comes to his constant touting of hydroxychloroquine as a therapy, despite no valid scientific studies being done to test its effectiveness against this virus. Most of the studies so far have shown either no efficacy or actual harm, with a worse outcome in many cases. 

But one after another, they sat up there and grilled Dr. Bright about hydroxychloroquine and "why not try it?" I'll sum up Dr. Bright's answer and then I'll give my own to that question. He said, in essence, "Your anecdotal evidence doesn't count for shit." 

My answer is that you don't try treatments when you don't know the outcomes. While the treatment has been around for a long time as a malaria drug and for some other conditions, it has not been fully vetted as a treatment for this virus. There is a shit-ton that we don't know about this virus and about the damage it causes to various tissues and systems, and just shoving a drug at it willy-nilly is irresponsible and negligent at best and downright malpractice at worst. 

Some of these people in Congress keep trying to appease the toddler in the White House and say, "It works for malaria. Why not give it a try?"

The reason I gave on Facebook is basically this: there are many treatments that work for one thing and don't work for another. A simple example is that penicillin-class antibiotics can be quite effective against some Gram-positive organisms like Staph and Strep. (Not so much Staph anymore, but that's because it developed resistance, so much so that penicillin is no longer an effective antibiotic against Staph.) However, due to its mechanism against organisms (it involves differences in cell walls), penicillin and most other antibiotics in that class are completely ineffective against Gram-negative organisms like E coli or Pseudomonas. 

So, to give a treatment example: if you had a patient who presented with septicemia (a blood infection) caused by E coli and you gave your patient penicillin, you would be causing harm because that is an ineffective treatment. Your patient would die because that is a very serious infection, one of the most life-threatening you can get. "What do you have to lose?" Well, when you push ineffective treatments, your patient could lose their life. 

Here's another very simple example: a couple of ibuprofen works great on a headache, but it ain't gonna do shit for your yeast infection, honey. But if you take enough ibuprofen, you risk renal damage. But hey, what have you got to lose, right? 

That's why it is important to conduct the studies and determine whether or not the treatment can cure, mitigate or decrease the length of illness, or if it causes actual harm. We have not done those studies on the magnitude that is necessary and it is beyond irresponsible for people to be pushing any sort of treatment without the necessary vetting. 

I know this was way too science-y but everything I'm hearing from the non-scientists in this administration is grating on my last nerve. It is glaringly obvious that they have no clue what they're talking about. 

Although I have a suggestion. Perhaps some sort of bleach injection or ingestion could help. Come on, fellas.

What have you got to lose? 

Let us now praise strong women

You come on with a "come on"
You don't fight fair
That's OK, see if I care
Knock me down, it's all in vain
I'll get right back on my feet again

~~ "Hit Me With Your Best Shot" by Pat Benatar

Walking into the club like....

On Friday, November 15, 2019, former Ukraine Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch testified before Congress in an open hearing. She was the third person to testify, and while all three State Department officials were impressive, Ms. Yovanovitch struck a special chord in me. 

I thought all three witnesses so far—George Kent, Bill Taylor, and Ms. Yovanovitch—were shining examples of exemplary government service. We hear about the petty bureaucrats, the sycophants, the do-nothings in Congress, the stonewalling in the Senate, the absurdities of the current administration, ad nauseam. It's enough to turn a person off of politics forever. We rarely get to see the hard-working professionals who do their jobs day-in and day-out with competence and integrity. It was a breath of fresh air to see three such knowledgeable, conscientious adults in service to our government, usually working behind the scenes in relative anonymity, provide an example of service. Their goals are not to advance their own positions; their goal is to advance the policies of the United States.

But something about Ms. Yovanovitch was special. Based on the response to my posts on social media, I'm not the only one who felt this way. I'll be the first to admit that I can be quite emotional at times, so I wasn't entirely surprised when the hearing ended and I started crying. The audience at the hearing burst into applause and cheers and gave her a standing ovation. That was what really got to me. In case you missed it, you should watch. 

The utterly ridiculous Gym Jordan (thanks to Esquire magazine for the name) of Ohio tried shouting about some point of order after Chairman Schiff had already gaveled the hearing closed. And then you hear the applause and shouts and see people standing as Ms. Yovanovitch leaves the room. It was something to see. 

But why did it make me cry? I cry at some really silly things sometimes, but there was something about this that got me right in the feels. In addition to being emotional, I am also self-reflective. If I behave a certain way and I'm not sure why I like to try to figure it out. Not that I think it will stop me from behaving that way in the future, but I do like to know the reasons behind why I behave the way I do! 

So I took a day to think about it. 

In addition to what I wrote above about how refreshing it is to see people in the government who are decent, knowledgeable, coherent, and conscientious, what got me about Ms. Yovanovitch is that she was subjected to the same bullshit women have been subjected to for centuries. She was removed from her job merely because she was standing in the way of the so-called president and his minions with their nefarious schemes. By all accounts, she was great at her job, highly respected in the diplomatic corps, and a very hard worker who was sometimes in very dangerous areas. Her good reputation was savaged by others in the furtherance of their shady plot. She did nothing but work for her country for decades and for that she was rewarded with this utterly shoddy and shameless treatment. 

Not to mention the fact that during the hearing, the so-called president went all meangirl on her and sent some nasty tweets her way during the hearing, saying things that were patently untrue and unfair. He did his best to intimidate and bully her. He took his best shot. And you know what? 

She was having none of his bullshit. 

She continued to testify (I can only hope I would have such fortitude), she did not get hysterical or angry (I'm looking at you, Brett Kavanaugh), she just calmly and coolly continued to answer every question that was given her to the best of her ability. She handled herself with strength and grace, and she impressed the hell out of me. 

She was not cowed. She did not bow before his bullying tactics. She was going to have her time before Congress and she was not going to be silenced. 

So when people in the audience stood and cheered for her (it's hard to tell, but it looks like it was mostly women), and I cheered and cried myself, we were doing so for every time people have tried to bully us or make us feel inferior. For every time some dude has mansplained to us. (Hey, did I ever tell you about that idiot ex of mine who tried to show me how to make hospital corners on a bed? Or how to load sheets into the washing machine? This was when I was in my 30s and I'd gone through college, been married for five years, and then lived on my own for ten years. No? Another day, perhaps.) For every time we've been harassed, belittled, objectified, and groped. Ms. Yovanovitch wasn't standing up to a jerk of an ex-boyfriend or ex-husband. She was standing up to the jerk currently occupying the White House of the United States of America. 

And to that, I say, "Fuck yeah!" 

It was vindicating, it was verifying, it was empowering, and there was a certain measure of complete, evil, satisfied glee. 

I don't know what is going to happen in the 2020 election, but I know that the majority of women in America have had it with putting up with this asshole who reminds us of every pig we've ever met in our lives. It seems that there is a segment of the female population who is somewhat masochistic and will never give him up. Kind of like the abusive husband who they stay with because when she tells him that that Mexican guy in the corner is looking at her weird, her husband goes over and beats him up. Yeah, kind of like that. 

But the rest of us are ready to kick that asshole to the curb and say, "I can do better than you. I'm worth more than the shitty treatment you give me. I'm finding myself someone who treats me the way I deserve to be treated. I am DONE with you." Then we can top it all off with a nice kick in the nuts. 

THAT is what I felt after Ms. Yovanovitch's testimony. And I don't think I'm the only one.