Ebola’s Spread Sparks Debate on Developmental Medicines

July 10, 2014, 9:29 a.m.

Spe­cial­ists are de­bat­ing calls to em­ploy de­vel­op­ment­al medi­cines against an Ebola out­break ravaging West Africa, the Ca­na­dian Press re­ports.

A num­ber of ana­lysts said dis­trib­ut­ing vac­cines or drug treat­ments that are not fully tested may boost loc­al dis­trust of of­fi­cials that have been fight­ing the spread of Ebola hem­or­rhagic fever since March, the news agency re­por­ted on Wed­nes­day. No fully vet­ted medi­cines cur­rently ex­ist for the dis­ease, which as of Tues­day may have killed more than 500 people in Guinea, Liber­ia and Si­erra Le­one.

Ac­cord­ing to some op­pon­ents of us­ing such medi­cines, any ad­verse side ef­fects may threaten years of ef­forts to de­vel­op the drugs as a de­fense against the po­ten­tial bio­lo­gic­al-weapon agent.

“It would be un­eth­ic­al to roll [de­vel­op­ment­al medi­cines] out now, in my opin­ion,” said Dav­id Hey­mann, a former World Health Or­gan­iz­a­tion as­sist­ant dir­ect­or gen­er­al.

Of­fi­cials could in­stead move, once the cur­rent threat sub­sides, to lay the ground­work for us­ing such treat­ments to com­bat fu­ture out­breaks, Hey­mann ar­gued. The World Health Or­gan­iz­a­tion could make such policy pre­par­a­tions in col­lab­or­a­tion with drug de­velopers and re­gion­al gov­ern­ments, he said.

One ex­pert, though, pressed for im­me­di­ately us­ing Ebola coun­ter­meas­ures now in a late stage of de­vel­op­ment.

“Ima­gine if you take a re­gion of Canada, Amer­ica, Europe and you had 450 people dy­ing of a vir­al hem­or­rhagic fever. It would just be un­ac­cept­able — and it’s un­ac­cept­able in West Africa,” said Jeremy Far­rar, a trop­ic­al medi­cine and glob­al health spe­cial­ist at Ox­ford Uni­versity.

What We're Following See More »
History Already Being Less Kind to Hastert’s Leadership
1 hours ago

In light of his recent confessions, the speakership of Dennis Hastert is being judged far more harshly. The New York Times' Carl Hulse notes that in hindsight, Hastert now "fares poorly" on a number of fronts, from his handling of the Mark Foley page scandal to "an explosion" of earmarks to the weakening of committee chairmen. "Even his namesake Hastert rule—the informal standard that no legislation should be brought to a vote without the support of a majority of the majority — has come to be seen as a structural barrier to compromise."

Trump Ill Prepared for General Election
1 hours ago

Even if "[t]he Republican presidential nomination may be in his sights ... Trump has so far ignored vital preparations needed for a quick and effective transition to the general election. The New York businessman has collected little information about tens of millions of voters he needs to turn out in the fall. He's sent few people to battleground states compared with likely Democratic rival Hillary Clinton, accumulated little if any research on her, and taken no steps to build a network capable of raising the roughly $1 billion needed to run a modern-day general election campaign."

Congress Can’t Seem Not to Pay Itself
4 hours ago

Rep. Dave Young can't even refuse his own paycheck. The Iowa Republican is trying to make a point that if Congress can't pass a budget (it's already missed the April 15 deadline) then it shouldn't be paid. But, he's been informed, the 27th Amendment prohibits him from refusing his own pay. "Young’s efforts to dock his own pay, however, are duck soup compared to his larger goal: docking the pay of every lawmaker when Congress drops the budget ball." His bill to stiff his colleagues has only mustered the support of three of them. Another bill, sponsored by Rep. Jim Cooper (D-TN), has about three dozen co-sponsors.

How Far Away from Cleveland is the California GOP Staying?
5 hours ago

Sixty miles away, in Sandusky, Ohio. "We're pretty bitter about that," said Harmeet Dhillon, vice chairwoman of the California Republican Party. "It sucks to be California, we're like the ugly stepchild. They need us for our cash and our donors, they don't need us for anything else."

SCOTUS Will Not Allow ‘DC Madam’ Phone Records to Be Released
5 hours ago

Anyone looking forward to seeing some boldfaced names on the client list of the late Deborah Jeane Palfrey, the "DC Madam," will have to wait a little longer. "The Supreme Court announced Monday it would not intervene to allow" the release of her phone records, "despite one of her former attorneys claiming the records are “very relevant” to the presidential election. Though he has repeatedly threatened to release the records if courts do not modify a 2007 restraining order, Montgomery Blair Sibley tells U.S. News he’s not quite sure what he now will do."