I think the answer is a combination of a few things.
They didn't know what they didn't know, and 28 days probably found its way into the mix along the way as a fair assessment of something that needed to work much faster. Their whole organization is based around benchmarking and comparing, so if 28 days happens along the way it's probably going to continue to happen for anyone who comes after. And if they're losing people within hours or days of arriving at the hospital, giving a medication for two weeks doesn't seem all that unreasonable at face value. People who didn't really know or truly understand Leronlimab were helping design a trial for a problem they didn't really know or truly understand. And they were doing it in real time while people were dying left and right. Plus they were clearly more focused on other treatments because they thought they knew better.
Another problem I see contributing is how doctors are trained. They aren't trained to take symptoms presented to them and look for the most obscure, or complicated reason like they're on an episode of House. They start with the most likely cause, and then look to apply the most relevant treatment. One can imagine that as people were presenting with flu-like or viral symptoms that doctors probably felt like they'd be able to handle it with all their knowledge and resources from years of treating patients presenting similarly. They were thinking about fluids, antivirals, steroids, and antibiotics. The things that have always treated or helped with the kinds of things they were seeing. This automatically steers their efforts to known treatments and disease pathways, sucking up time and resources. It doesn't take long to get too far down that road to where you can't see any of the flashing lights behind you that might alert you to other options.
The other problem, is that if they already thought Nader and Amarex were a couple of hacks, then they weren't going to lend ANY credence to their argument about Leronlimab having potential. Judging by Strayhorn's comments, can you imagine her taking anything Nader was saying about covid and LL with anything less than gigantic skepticism? We can argue that it's not her job to judge the potential of a drug based on what she thinks of it's caretakers. But when the system is already of the belief that they can probably handle it with known pathways, protocols, and treatments, having a small company viewed as amateurs claiming they have the cure isn't going to receive much love.
It sure does seem like the FDA's thoughts on Nader and/or Cytodyn played a part, I just don't know know how much of it was purposeful and how much of it was the system's inability to pivot and/or its reliance on the big boys who get the first crack at steering the ship.
They didn't know what they didn't know, and 28 days probably found its way into the mix along the way as a fair assessment of something that needed to work much faster. Their whole organization is based around benchmarking and comparing, so if 28 days happens along the way it's probably going to continue to happen for anyone who comes after. And if they're losing people within hours or days of arriving at the hospital, giving a medication for two weeks doesn't seem all that unreasonable at face value. People who didn't really know or truly understand Leronlimab were helping design a trial for a problem they didn't really know or truly understand. And they were doing it in real time while people were dying left and right. Plus they were clearly more focused on other treatments because they thought they knew better.
Another problem I see contributing is how doctors are trained. They aren't trained to take symptoms presented to them and look for the most obscure, or complicated reason like they're on an episode of House. They start with the most likely cause, and then look to apply the most relevant treatment. One can imagine that as people were presenting with flu-like or viral symptoms that doctors probably felt like they'd be able to handle it with all their knowledge and resources from years of treating patients presenting similarly. They were thinking about fluids, antivirals, steroids, and antibiotics. The things that have always treated or helped with the kinds of things they were seeing. This automatically steers their efforts to known treatments and disease pathways, sucking up time and resources. It doesn't take long to get too far down that road to where you can't see any of the flashing lights behind you that might alert you to other options.
The other problem, is that if they already thought Nader and Amarex were a couple of hacks, then they weren't going to lend ANY credence to their argument about Leronlimab having potential. Judging by Strayhorn's comments, can you imagine her taking anything Nader was saying about covid and LL with anything less than gigantic skepticism? We can argue that it's not her job to judge the potential of a drug based on what she thinks of it's caretakers. But when the system is already of the belief that they can probably handle it with known pathways, protocols, and treatments, having a small company viewed as amateurs claiming they have the cure isn't going to receive much love.
It sure does seem like the FDA's thoughts on Nader and/or Cytodyn played a part, I just don't know know how much of it was purposeful and how much of it was the system's inability to pivot and/or its reliance on the big boys who get the first crack at steering the ship.
29
