Reasons for volunteering to become infected with COVID-19

During these unprecedented times, many want to help the world overcome a pandemic. Recently, I’ve noticed that in addition to social distance, you can do something else-volunteer for the human challenge trial of vaccines. Challenge trials speed vaccine development and save lives.

Take a look at the COVID-19 vaccine development overview and see how ethics plays a role. Many experts estimate that it will take 12-18 months for the vaccine to fully develop. Even now, some of the vaccine candidates are still in human trials, and volunteers receive either vaccine candidates or placebo. Participants continue their lives and are probably exposed to the virus. After months of monitoring, scientists assess the efficacy of vaccine candidates. Given the dire nature of pandemics, it is imperative to accelerate the development of the COVID-19 vaccine in a scientifically and ethically relevant manner. The Human Challenge Trial is one way to do this.

In the challenge trial, young, healthy adults (18-40 years old) receive either a vaccine candidate or a placebo. Instead of releasing the volunteers to bring them back into their lives and waiting months for results, the volunteers are deliberately exposed to the virus. Scientists can more quickly determine if a vaccine candidate is valid. This method will probably accelerate vaccine development, but people have questioned whether this is ethical. I believe that challenge trials are not only morally acceptable, but can be morally demanding in some circumstances.

This question has two main moral elements. First, there are moral questions that arise from having volunteers in this position. Next, we need to consider the implications of this for the entire world.

Let’s start with the first worry. Is it morally acceptable to have these young adults in this potentially dangerous situation? I think so. Scientists do not “put” or force people like me into challenging trials. Many young people are willing to take risks for vaccine development. actually, One group Challenge trial defenders have already seen around 8000 volunteers.

I often hear it is a war with an invisible enemy. Volunteers are like soldiers. By challenging trials, they are fighting wars where serious harm and death are unlikely, but unfortunately they are possible. Challenge trial volunteers just take risks for the community and a better world. For these reasons, you don’t have to worry about the morality of the process.

To confirm that the COVID-19 Challenge exam is moral, we need to consider a second question regarding its global impact. This can be achieved by considering the world created by the two scenarios. did not do it Adopted Challenge Trial, (B) did Adopt a challenge trial.

Start with World A. Even in this case, vaccine development is promising, but a few months later than World B. The quote isn’t perfect, but the advocacy group 1 day It is estimated that developing a vaccine three months ago could save 1.6 million lives. Moreover, if people are still quarantined during this period, other unintended consequences Child abuse, suicide,and Mental health problems It gets worse. It will be financially unstable. Wealthy countries like the United States may have limited temporary fixes to these problems. However, poor countries that cannot provide welfare to the public cannot do much to reduce suffering and death. In short, the longer a vaccine takes to arrive, the more difficult it becomes in the world.

Now look at World B. The vaccine can be expected to arrive early in the world, eliminating the months of death and suffering experienced by people in World A. The trade-off is that challenge trial volunteers who receive placebo or invalid vaccine candidates are certainly vulnerable. They can develop serious symptoms and die on challenge trials. This is definitely a tragedy and will be a huge loss for World B.

Although much is unknown about the virus, it is worth mentioning that serious harm or death can occur, but it is rare in young and healthy demographics. based on Recent antibody testNew York Governor Anthony Cuomo suggests that actual COVID-19 mortality may be near 0.5%. Conditional mortality in young adults without preexisting conditions will be significantly lower-maybe Kidney donation, at 0.03%.

Comparing the two worlds, we can see that World B with the challenge trial is far superior to World A without them. The death and suffering of World A is much worse than that of World B. When moral choices are associated with a better world, it may be our moral obligation to try to achieve World B. Therefore, the Moral Dimension of “Impact” also supports Challenge Trials.

Oxford Scientist And other laboratories are starting human trials for their vaccine candidates. Certain bureaucratic systems may hinder the adoption of human challenge attempts, but scientists should not be hindered by these moral concerns. In fact, scientists can claim moral concerns Strengthen Volunteer volunteers to do a challenge trial. Scientists who have already begun testing vaccine candidates will still benefit from the challenge trial. They shouldn’t worry about losing time.

Recently written by Professor Peter Singer Written opinion We are advocating the Human Challenge Trial. If a scientist needs moral advice from a renowned ethicist such as a singer, or if you want to know what a volunteer like me thinks, here’s where we provide insights I’m here. Once selected, you will immediately get a vaccine candidate or placebo and be exposed to the virus. I know this will make the world a better place.

Isaac Martinez is a senior in the Department of Philosophy. He can be reached at [email protected].