• GBU_28@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    54
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    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

    • blackbelt352@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      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.

      • GBU_28@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        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.

        • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          @astreus never made that claim.

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

          • astreus@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            8 months ago

            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

          • GBU_28@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

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

            • astreus@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              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.” 😉

                • astreus@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  Now who’s being disingenuous 😂

                  The implicature of cause and effect is reversed

                  • GBU_28@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    8 months ago

                    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.

    • astreus@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      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)

      • Ranvier@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        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).

        • astreus@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          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.

      • GBU_28@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        “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.

        • astreus@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          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.

          • GBU_28@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

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

    • ripcord@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      8 months ago

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