On Monday night, Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Commissioner Stephen Hahn corrected comments he had made the day before, responding to critics who suggested he had overstated the benefits of a possible treatment for coronavirus.
Members of the Trump administration, including the president himself, announced on Sunday that the infusion of convalescent plasma from COVID-19 survivors to patients afflicted with the disease would be granted authorization for emergency use.
“This is a powerful therapy that transfuses very, very strong antibodies from the blood of recovered patients to help patients battling an infection,” President Donald Trump said during the press briefing. “It’s had an incredible rate of success.”
Other officials, including Hahn, touted the treatment as a huge step forward for treating coronavirus, but after criticisms began to mount over the words Hahn used to push that narrative, he recognized his mistake.
“I have been criticized for remarks I made Sunday night about the benefits of convalescent plasma. The criticism is entirely justified,” Hahn said on Twitter. “What I should have said better is that the data show a relative risk reduction not an absolute risk reduction.”
Hahn noted in earlier tweets, too, that the emergency use of convalescent plasma did not imply a “final approval” of the treatment. That hasn’t stopped other administration officials from boasting about it, however.
“What we have is really a historic achievement here, a historic milestone, which is authorizing convalescent plasma for emergency use,” Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar said during an interview with NPR.
However, both Azar and Trump appear to be exaggerating the treatment’s efficacy. Trump officials have cited a Mayo Clinic study that suggests convalescent plasma is, by their reading of the data, “beneficial” for 35 percent of patients that used it. However, a number of health experts have said the administration is overly optimistic about the treatment, and that the study they cited had limitations, including lacking a comparative placebo group.
“While the data to date show some positive signals that convalescent plasma can be helpful in treating individuals with COVID-19, especially if given early in the trajectory of the disease, we lack the randomized controlled trial data we need to better understand its utility in COVID-19 treatment,” Thomas File, president of the Infectious Diseases Society of America, said.
Even the lead authors of the study the Trump administration is citing have expressed their doubts about the White House’s conclusions.
“Do I know where the 35 percent comes from? No,” one of the authors of the study, Arturo Casadevall of Johns Hopkins University, said.
The emergency use authorization itself came about in a controversial way. Officials from the National Institutes of Health tried to stop the FDA from granting the authorization last week, stating that more data was needed before it should be considered. The president responded to that delay by suggesting on Twitter, without evidence, that a “deep state” operation within the agency was conspiring to make him look bad.
Hahn responded to those accusations from the president while speaking to reporters from Reuters. “I have not seen anything that I would consider to be ‘deep state’ at the FDA,” he said.
We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.
As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.
Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.
As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.
At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.
Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.
You can help by giving today. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.