Donald Trump contradicts CDC director on coronavirus vaccine timeline rollout

Noted that you cannot back up your own assertion that:

“They've already got 100 million ready to go as soon as FDA approves. ”

 

Yes, I have found that too. But it is not what hawgsalot said. He said

“They've already got 100 million ready to go as soon as FDA approves. ”

 

We have been so far. Why do you have a problem with the USA leading the way?

 

Do you mean manufacturers or the FDA?

I googled class action suits targeting the FDA, and nothing comes up.

Now, your comment begs the question, can the FDA be sued for approving a drug that winds up harming people ( Viox, Thalidomide, etc ) ?

Well, one law firm's website states thus:

Although the FDA is a federal agency, there is no federal law authorizing civil compensation for individual consumers harmed by dangerous drugs. Instead, people injured by dangerous drugs rely on state products liability law.


As for Manufacturers of vaccines, as of 1986, with the passage of the National Child Vaccine Injury Act, they cannot be sued for manufacturing faulty vaccines, noting that vaccines do not go through the same rigorous clinical trial protocols that drugs do, though they have their own protocols ( for example, in a vaccine trial, a placebo is often a former version of a drug, or one with similar adjuvants, if I recall correctly, having looked this up once upon a time ). Personally, I believe this law should be repealed. However, pharma threatened to stop making vaccines unless they passed the law. I think they were bluffing, and the powerful lobby got to too many congressmen/women.

So, if we are talking vaccines, I assume You mean lawsuits brought to the Vaccine Injury court, quite a number, over $4 billion has been awarded thus far, and autism suits are automatically rejected, noting that the awards are paid for by tax payers, not manufacturers.

If you mean fraud lawsuits against pharmaceutical firms, quite a few there, as well.

However,.....

But, you are, in essence, using the 'tossing the baby out with the bathwater' logic. I mean, I'm on one med, without which I would suffer greatly, so I'm not tossing that one aside because some guy on PF said I shouldn't take it because pharma or the FDA has been sued a lot.

No one is suggesting blindly accepting everything science hands us, but the alternative is what? Ask waiters?

I don't blindly accept everything the medical establishment tells me. I'm 69, and the medical establishment tells me to get a flu shot.

However, on the CDC's own website, they say that the flu vax is not that effective for children under 2 and people over 60, and given that I haven't had the flu in 40 years, from my vantage point, getting a flu shot makes no sense. However, if there were a diptheria surge in my neighborhood, I'd get the shot. So, it depends.

My doctor wanted to put me on a statin, but my research indicates to me that the 'science' that declares this drug as necessary is flawed, and that came to me from a source I find very credible ( but I"m still getting more opinions ) so I'm not taking it for now.

So, I listen to the FDA/CDC/NIH, etc, but I do my homework, too, and I recommend others to do theirs, as well.

 

My question was about products deemed "safe and effective". The list is a long one. You are wise not to start taking statins.

 

Show your evidence for that please.

 

The picking is all in the nits.

 

Read it for yourself. All you have to do is look it up. I found it in seconds.

 

No, I cannot find anywhere where it says that the USA is leading in the race for a vaccine, or that it is doing more than anyone else is.

 

So pointing out completely false statements is nitpicking?

We truly are living in a post factual world. Trump supporters just don’t care about the truth.

 

Try looking.

 

Trump is an example of how not to govern during a pandemic. By not keeping a clear message, all he does is sew more confusion into an already tough spot for all. That said, how in eff could he possibly know more than these doctors !!!

 

I have and found nothing, so back to you Blue Leader.

 

President Trump beat obama by having a far better economy, while spending less money.

If obama was president during the chinavirus, he probably still wouldn't have called it a national emergency lol.

Obama was an affirmative action president.

 

Not dishonest at all, just pointing out the objective facts. Trump reversed obamas garbage trends and out performed him in every way, while spending less.

 

Obama didnt even take any action until thousands were dead.

Had he been the president now, we would have reached the 2 million mark that Trump saved us from.

Trump has proven a far better president than obama by a long shot.

Trump had a better economy, while spending less than obama did prior to the pandemic.

This will remain the objective fact regardless of how you choose to "feel" about it.

 

Yeah? Right.

If Hillary had been elected, the Covid Death Toll would be less than 5,000.

PROVE Me Wrong.

 

Just to give you people some perspective. I chose South Dakota randomly.

Population is 884,659.

Total cases: 17686. Total deaths 193.

Compared to my State, Queensland.

Population is 5.134 million.

Total cases: 11500. Total deaths 6.

Work it out for yourselves about how well Trump is doing.

 

It seemed like Trump was referring to a contract date the government had with drug companies.... I am not sure what the CDC director was basing his assertion on though. The way he thought about it seems like he just made an educated 'guess' and didn't have a predefined timeline.

 

Yes, he said that, and it is Trump-like in the lying stakes. It means they already have a vaccine and 100 million ready to disperse. Rubbish.

 

You may believe whatever you want

 

I expect the CDC director based his evidence to Congress on things like facts. Science. Research.

You know, all those things that trump and his supporters reject if they don't fit into his narrative.

And your assertion that trump made an educated guess is laughable. In order to make an educated guess he would have to be educated i.e. informed. Everything we know about him says that he doesn't take the time or make the effort to be informed by anything other than Fox.

 

and you seem to be ducking the fact that the director of the CDC is only relaying what the doctors who are researching the vaccine are reporting. The CDC is most definitely involved in developing a vaccine, as are many more organizations across the country and across the world. Again this isn't something that is exclusive to the US, this is something that is going on globally. Nowhere in the world are any of the doctors who are developing a vaccine expecting to have completed their trials by October

American doctors are not expecting to have completed their trials until February of 2021, and even then so they are not expecting to have the vaccine readily available till mid 2021 or later

 

Fine with me.

 

Not quite true. There are a number of developers who think their already produced vaccine just might get through the trials by the end of October. Or maybe not. Trump is getting the same input as the Director of the CDC, and he is also getting solid information on manufacturing and distribution. Trump is not asserting anything different from the information he is getting from all of the principals. Plus he has never claimed the vaccine will be available in late October. He has only stated that, surprisingly and good, it looks like there is a decent possibility. By the way, that is what gets the Democrats so upset. They do not want any vaccine until at least mid-November after all the votes will (likely) have been counted. If Biden wins they will take credit. If Trump wins they will impeach him for being so slow.