No, I’m not talking about Ayn Rand’s novel, though there are parallels.
The United States is now heading into its third wave of SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus cases, which is the cause of COVID-19. With over 8 million cases diagnosed, increasing by over 56,000 per day, and over 220,000 deaths, our top scientists are being silenced and bad mouthed by President Trump and his administration.
So whose advice is President Trump listening to? That would be Dr. Scott Atlas, who has said that masks don’t work, and that quickly spreading the disease to develop herd immunity would be a good thing, shrugging off the idea that herd immunity that did not come from a vaccine would come at the cost of potentially millions of deaths.
At a town hall Savanah Guthrie pointed out that Dr. Atlas is not an infectious disease expert (or an epidemiologist for that matter) but Trump said, “Look, he’s an expert. He’s one of the great experts of the world.” He’s a neuroradiologist, so I’ll grant him expertise in MRI images of the neck, but he should not be influencing how we deal with this pandemic. I wouldn’t want Dr. Fauci or Dr. Birx to be responsible to interpret an MRI, and we shouldn’t want Dr. Atlas affecting how we manage this pandemic.
When a patient leaves the hospital against the recommendation of their doctor, whether it’s to return home, or to go out for a smoke, it’s called leaving against medical advice, or AMA.
Yesterday President Trump left the hospital briefly so he could see his supporters on the streets near Walter Reed Hospital, where he has been hospitalized for COVID-19. In my book, he left AMA.
Not only did he needlessly put at risk the Secret Service agents who drove him around, but he put his own health at risk. If he is sick enough to get put on remdesivir, which is only approved by the FDA for emergency use, an experimental antibody cocktail that has only been approved for experimental use and was authorized on a compassionate basis, and the steroid dexamethasone, which was only found to be beneficial in those requiring mechanical ventilation or oxygen, then he is sick enough to remain in the hospital until he is ready to leave.
I attended the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences (USUHS) medical school, where part of my training was at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center. One of the things taught us was that contrary to what you might expect, generals often get worse care. The example given was a doctor skipping the prostate exam he would otherwise do so as not to embarrass the colonel, potentially missing a prostate cancer. Although nowadays the value of a routine prostate check is debatable, the lesson was correct. It applies more so to this president, who may be at risk of being overly treated, and those around him not insisting strongly enough that he follow doctor’s orders.
Given the COVID-19 pandemic it’s difficult to know what one should do about so many things, including what activities are safe, what precautions one should take to avoid getting infected, what to do with investments, and whether one should send their kids to school.
As a physician I often give advice to my patients regarding coronavirus. Unfortunately the current administration has politicized the coronavirus pandemic and provided inaccurate and inconsistent messages. They denied it was a problem for a long time, and even now discourage a large number of people from wearing masks.
Besides giving out false information from the very top, they’ve had a corrupting influence on our institutions that deal with this pandemic, affecting our ability to deal with it.
For example, with very short notice hospitals were directed to stop sending hospitalization information to the CDC, and instead send it to the Department of Health and Human Services, only to later reverse course because the data was not being processed correctly.
The Centers of Disease Control (CDC) is world renowned has has trained scientists around the world. They now have to run pandemic related news through the White House and have made many changes and removed documents off their web site due to political considerations. Recently they changed their recommendation to stop testing asymptomatic patents, prompting two scientists, one of which had won a Nobel Prize and was director of the National Institute of Health, to say that we should ignore that advice.
A week after President Trump publicly pressured the FDA to approve a vaccine, the head of the FDA said he might approve a vaccine, in certain circumstances, before Phase 3 research was done. These are the experiments that show that something is safe and effective. The name of the federal government’s program to develop a vaccine, Operation Warp Speed, and the frequent predictions by government officials that we would have a vaccine this year, suggests that they may be willing to cut corners. We should proceed as fast as possible, but it should be based on solid scientific principals and consensus. Even if the decision is made to give up some safety and assurance of a vaccine working because of concerns about the economy, it should be a conscious decision and not pretending the science is something it’s not. We already have a big problem with people distrusting vaccines in general. If an approved vaccine has unexpected problems, it could keep people getting many vaccines for a long time.
President Trump has touted other treatments, including hydroxychloroquine, bleach, and plasma. The FDA just approved emergency use of plasma, despite not having good evidence yet. That will make it harder to recruit patients into research studies, where they might get a placebo, making it all the harder to find out if it’s really effective. Although some of things might have merit, these are things that should be done based on science, and a leader with no medical or scientific background has no business touting unproven treatments.
Recently Dr. Scott Atlas has the ear of the president. He has questioned the use of masks and suggested we encourage infections to get herd immunity. We’re not even sure yet if being infected confers long term immunity, but even if it does, assuming it takes 65% of the population to become infected, and 1% of those infected dies, that means we’d have over 2 million deaths in this country. Dr. Atlas is not an infectious disease specialist or epidemiologist. He is a radiologist who specializes in MRIs. But his qualification, from the White House perspective, is that he has appeared on Fox News multiple times, and it resonates with what they want to hear.
My patients trust usually trust my advice, but if I have to question what the FDA, CDC, and other government bodies tell us, it’s harder for me to give good advice.
In spite of the COVID-19 pandemic, we’re now seeing large protests daily across the United States, and indeed in many places across the world, sparked by the unfortunate death of George Floyd by policeman in Minneapolis. The Black Lives Matter movement tries to address how blacks are unfairly treated, particularly by police.
This is a complex issue that dates back to when slavery was legal in the United States. I’ll leave the political and legal issues to others to discuss and will focus on health issues.
In the US the life expectancy for blacks is roughly 3 1/2 years less than for non-Hispanic whites as of 2014 according to the CDC. Why is that? It’s largely because they have more chronic medical problems, such as hypertension, diabetes, asthma, emphysema, obesity, and kidney disease. Why is that? Mostly because on average they are poorer, which leads to a worse diet, housing, working conditions, and access to health care. Why are they poorer? In part from racial injustice.
Even when blacks have access to good health care, they may be less likely to take their medications due to social norms, including distrust of the health care system.
With COVID-19 we’ve seen that black and some other minorities are at higher risk of getting infected, and are at greater risk of dying. So while participating in Black Lives Matters protests, they may be statistically at a higher risk of dying than from being killed due to racial injustice. Of course protests often carry risk, and for some it may be worth dying for. But do consider the risk of spreading it to others who may not want to die over it, and take reasonable precautions, particularly wearing a face mask, frequent hand washing, and maintaining social distancing as much as possible.
Recently I purchased a box on Amazon made by 59S to sterilize things using ultraviolet (UV) light. With the COVID-19 pandemic I have to think about masks that need to be reused, and my cellphone, keys, wallet, etc for the times I venture out. Sure I can wipe them down with disinfectant wipes, but those are in short supply, and can’t be used on everything.
This box puts out UV light in the 260-280 nm wavelength using LED lights, 15.6 watts, with a cycle of 3 minutes. The light is rated at 10,000 hours. That would be 200,000 treatments, though I’m not sure the zipper would last that long.
Given the almost $200 price, I was not only concerned about the possibility of having been ripped off, but was even more concerned that it might not work as advertised, and that things I thought had been sterilized might not actually be safe. Just because ultraviolet light is proven to be effective does not guarantee than any particular device works as advertised.
So I decided to purchase some Columbia Blood Agar, 5 Percent Sheep Blood plates to do a scientific experiment to test it. I used a method similar to this video, though I used a sleeve to cover the front, back, and sides of half of the petri dishes. Rather than a pure source of E coli, I just dipped a cotton swab in different sources (toilet bowl, dog water bowl, mouth). After a couple of days it clearly showed that the UV light worked with the bacteria only growing on the half that was shielded from the light, as shown below.
This box has 12 LED lights on the top and 12 on the bottom. So I knew it worked when exposed from above. The petri dish sits on little wire stand so it’s much closer to the bottom, so I had no concerns about adequate light on the bottom side, but what about the front, back, or sides of an object that might not be directly exposed to the lights? So I repeated the experiment, but propped up one dish perpendicular to the bottom and facing the front, and another facing the side.
Thanks to the reflective surface inside the box, it still worked, but not quite as well. As shown below, on a dish facing the front, the clear portion does not extend to the top (The scattered colonies in the clear part were not visible earlier. I’m uncertain if it represents a low level that was not killed, or maybe new grown from contamination from the air while examining the plate. I didn’t start with a pure bacteria nor have the means to distinguish the bacteria.) I had similar results on the side, and repeating this portion of the experiment.
I think the problem is that some items may fall into a shadow where they don’t get direct UV exposure, and they either don’t get indirect exposure from reflection, or if they do, they don’t get enough. Although just running a repeat cycle may fix the problem, a better solution would be to move the item to change the surfaces exposed to the front and bottom, and then repeat the cycle.
In practice, even if not perfect, it certainly decreases the risk of getting infected from the surface of an item treated. Most of the time the infection doesn’t take hold unless the number of bacteria or viruses exceeds the ability of the body to fight it off. Being mindful of where the lights are and how you’re putting things in the box may help.
I recommend the manufactures add lights to the front, back, and sides and perhaps change to a cylinder like a hat box.
Most cases of COVID-19 are probably transmitted from person to person via droplets, rather than from surfaces, but for those who can afford it, this device may lessen the risk of contracting it, or other infections, and provide peace of mind.