Congress voted against funding a cure for cancer just to block a win for Biden

vegeta@lemmy.world to politics @lemmy.world – 899 points –
Congress voted against funding a cure for cancer just to block a win for Biden
usatoday.com
91

You are viewing a single comment

Wow this comment really unwinds the one you replied to, so much so that the original seems in bad faith

Edit op edited, and improved their comment. You don't need to defend them, they are fine on their own

It’s almost as if people just go on lemmy and tell lies.

What's next, socialism has been tried and didn't quite work??

I mean, it's still true that Cuba has likely made significant advances in the cancer medicine, but it hasn't passed the standards of the FDA yet. And it's still true that the embargo between Cuba and the US is upheld to this day by politicians despite the potential good that could come from opening up trade again.

The first comment to me reads as more just overly enthusiastic, more than explicitly bad faith to me.

Definitely wasn't bad faith and I do stand by it.

Vaccine does not mean cure. We did not have a Covid cure either. And much like the covid vaccine isn't 100% effective, neither is this. However, it is proving effective, especially in combination with other drugs and at certain stages of treatment.

Stage 4 clinical trials were concluded in Cuba in 2017. Stage 2 trials were concluded in the US in 2023. I believe, strongly, that the embargo has increased the amount of time the research has taken - cooperation is impossible during an embargo.

Even if they lift the embargo tomorrow the drug wouldn't come on the market, however it is because of the embargo that the use in treatment has taken far, far longer than it would have otherwise.

Edit: I admit I knew less about the vaccine than I thought I did (edited my comment to reflect what I have learnt)

I agree it may have presented barriers for coordination the FDA and access to US markets. I haven't been able to dig deep into the Cuban studies, but just because something is labeled a phase 3 or phase 4 by the investigators doesn't necessarily mean it was done to the standards necessary for fda approval or in the correct context of current standard of care treatments in the US or who knows how many other issues. If it was fully ready for all markets as is and required no further investigations, and it was only the US FDA causing problems, I would expect it to have already been widely available in many other countries that don't have embargos with Cuba, like all of Europe. Currently it's only available in Cuba, Colombia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Peru, and Paraguay.

Mostly though I didn't want someone to accidentally misread this and think it meant cure. I realize you did not say that, but it's just a common misreading I've noticed people make of the term cancer vaccines when they've been mentioned in popular media. Didn't want someone to drag their poor dying relative off to Paraguay thinking they're getting cured.

I agree the Cuban embargo is ridiculous, should be stopped, and is hurting both countries with no benefit to anyone (other than keeping a certain segment of voters in Florida happy).

like all of Europe

While Europe does not have an embargo, up until 2016 the EU and Cuba basically had 0 relationship. The EU created "The Common Position" in 1996 which was "to encourage a process of transition to a pluralist democracy" in Cuba which the Cuba government rejected as meddling in their internal affairs.

Then in the 2000s there was a bigger spat where Cuba even started rejecting EU aid.

But since 2017 they've actually really warmed relations so this is a super good point!

Thank you for kicking off these research dives with your comments.

"yes, it works, and has been independently verified" makes it seem like it is 100% ready for us markets but not available. That's not the case, and it seems you knew that.

100% ready for us markets

How would that be possible during an embargo?

If a treatment is developed in the EMA, there's a level of cooperation that means drugs can come to market quickly if proven safe and even somewhat effective (Covid vaccine is an extreme example). This treatment would likely be US ready without the embargo in place.

it seems you knew that

My original comment was a glib link to a wikipedia page. I had not done the research and have edited my comment above.

Your last sentence here would change the sentiment of your original comment in a positive way. I encourage an edit.

Reuters is bad faith?

The incomplete characterization that the drug was READY for us markets.

It is not fda approved.

Edit After discussion, the op elected to make the seen edits in their comment. I'd refer you to them.

@astreus never made that claim.

It is currently available in Cuba, Colombia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Peru and Paraguay.[

I agree, I did not make that claim! And I do find it a bit weird that people are using that line of attack. But c'est la vie. I was wrong about what the treatment did, I was wrong about the level of verification it had, however we are singing from the same hymn sheet

This has already been discussed and op met my edit request. You aren't part of this.

For the sake of transparency, I edited before you suggested I did - hence my comment "I had not done the research and have edited my comment above." πŸ˜‰

My edit request was met. No comment on order of operations.

Now who's being disingenuous πŸ˜‚

The implicature of cause and effect is reversed

When I made my claim your comment was not of quality, you hadn't edited yet. When token boomer was commenting to me, you had.

Nope, I had already. Hence why I said "I have edited my comment" and then you said "you should edit your comment.

Well that's fucking wrong else I wouldn't have started this whole thing, as I've indicated your edit is satisfactory

Check again.

"My original comment was a glib link to a wikipedia page. I had not done the research and have edited my comment above"

To which you replied:

"Your last sentence here would change the sentiment of your original comment in a positive way. I encourage an edit."

I was going to reply with "what, I should edit my comment again to say I have edited my comment" but decided it wasn't as funny typed as in my head.

Sorry, mate, you are wrong. But over the most stupidly ridiculously small thing on the internet (and that's saying something)

I just want us to be clear: your satisfaction/demands mean literally nothing to me so please don't take credit for the other poster helping me do my research πŸ€·β€β™‚οΈ

You're the one reviving this thread. You posted your top level comment. The other commenter destroyed your bullshit claim, and I said ,"wow this really highlighted the bullshit". You hadn't edited then, cause both of our comments wouldn't make sense.

Unless you have timestamps, I believe your edit came either at the same time, or after I and the other comment called for you to tidy up your misinformation, which you did. Of course you didn't do it for me or because of me, I'm not your mom.

You got called out and are now flailing. Just let it go

My "you should edit" comment was may 6th at 356.

Your edit was at may 6 425.

Edit The point of all of this end of the thread is that token boomer showed up far later than that, of any edits, acting like none of them happened

2 more...
2 more...
2 more...
2 more...
2 more...
2 more...
2 more...
2 more...
2 more...
2 more...
2 more...
2 more...

Sounds more like just just being I'll informed, don't see much reason to assume bad faith.

3 more...