Strict lockdowns might work in some countries, but they aren't going to work everywhere. Americans in particular reject such restrictions on liberty, which is why a strict lockdown is sort of like abstinence-only sex education.
Are those who claim that life will never go back to normal after the coronavirus, correct? Are we condemned to live in a Brave New World, governed by social distancing and disinfection protocols, in which perfect hygiene is the greatest good?
The FDA’s rigorous oversight – rather than a race to satisfy an aggressive agenda – is imperative during this pandemic.
Do people acquire long-term immunity to coronavirus? Will there be a second wave? Will there be more lockdowns? Some recent news helps shed light on these questions.
While coronavirus is obviously concerning and a very real threat to some people (namely, the elderly and immunocompromised), these data also show that the risk for the rest of the population is quite low.
Sixteen people walk into a bar... Sounds like an old joke, right? Except it isn't funny. Florida allowed some bars to open on June 5. One day later the 16 met in a packed Jacksonville Beach bar. All 16 came down with Covid-19. Perhaps someone ought to rethink that decision.
Perhaps someday a ballad will be written about the tragic tale of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and its ugly cousin chloroquine (CQ). HCQ, a potential (and controversial) therapy for COVID-19 at one time, is no more. The FDA revoked the emergency authorization of both HCQ and CQ. This was an example of how NOT to develop a drug. A lesson learned -- or not.
Most drug and vaccine candidates fail. However, the success rate varies wildly depending on the therapeutic area. The probability that at least one coronavirus vaccine will win FDA approval is quite high, though that does not mean it will work well.
Should Facebook be in the business of "debunking" news and scientific data when events are rapidly changing? What's true today may be declared false tomorrow, only to be declared true again a week later. Furthermore, does Facebook have the expertise to do so?
As an anti-coronavirus therapy, Remdesivir has been rather disappointing. That's primarily because the drug is given intravenously to those who are already very ill with COVID-19. But what would happen if the drug could be delivered directly to the lungs, to prevent severe disease? Gilead is giving it a shot. Here are some of the pros and cons of that approach.
We tend to overlook how natural disasters like the coronavirus pandemic shape human behavior. Maybe that should change.
We're social animals, and we want to socialize. We're also lazy, and we want to do whatever is easiest or most convenient. Those two facts about human nature, far more than the coronavirus, will shape our future.