1daysoonervolunteers

Yes. -Wilson

Hey doomedroadtrips, thanks for the kind words!

As for your question: yes.

-Wilson

Good question, not at all silly! That was essentially my first question when I signed up.

The biggest individual risk in the trial is basically that you get an ineffectual or a placebo vaccine. Vaccines have already been administered to people in earlier safety trials, so the risk for side effects is low--we'd know already if there were side effects from the vaccines themselves. With vaccines in general, the main possible side effect is basically just that you get the symptoms of the disease you're supposed to be inoculating against. -Gavriel

Hey lemonlemonlemonade! I think that's a great question! Since challenge trials involve being exposed to the virus as well as the vaccine, both are potential risk factors.

According to a study published in Lancet Scientific, COVID-19 has an average short-term fatality rate of 3/10,000 among Americans 20-29 years of age. That's something to take seriously, for sure, but its comparable to other activities such as kidney donations or pregnancy. Additionally, we will be under continuous medical supervision in a medical facility by leading researchers during the trial, which lowers risk. Personally, I don't have any known underlying conditions, and am at the bottom of that study's age bracket, so my risk is likely lower. My biggest worry about getting COVID as a young healthy person would be that it may have some serious long-term effect we don't know about, much like we later found was the case with SARS or MERS.

As far as the dangers from the vaccine go, that's less quantifiable, and it will depend on what the vaccine candidate is. By the time that a human challenge trial volunteer would be exposed to the vaccine, it will have already been tested on smaller numbers of humans, so there's that. These dangers will also exist for non-challenge trial volunteers. --Wilson

I think that’s a really interesting point! I can see what you are saying—any talk of paying volunteers needs to weigh concerns that it would coerce people to take risks they might not otherwise take. But it also bothers me that this logic doesn’t seem to be applied to other places in society: we do and should pay lumberjacks, (non-draft) soldiers, and firefighters, many of whom may be putting themselves at greater danger. Practicing medicine also poses huge risk to those who do it during the pandemic—does that mean we should stop compensating them? I think clearly not.

I’m not volunteering for the money—I’m not getting paid and don’t expect that I ever will. But if I am able to participate in a trial, it will be a valuable service rendered to the vaccine manufacturers and society at large, at significant personal expense (in terms of risk, time, and opportunity cost). I feel volunteers should be compensated for that.

I think a kind of similar topic to this that I’d be interested to hear people talk about (I’m sure Abie’s perspective would be cool to hear!) is the idea of paying non-directed living kidney donors. There’s a huge amount of people who need kidney donations, and a new kidney could make huge life expectancy and quality of life improvements. Then, on the other hand, many young healthy people have an extra kidney they could donate at what is likely a relatively low risk. The private and public cost of treating kidney disease without donations is enormous—so much so, that you could feasibly have some kind of legislation where (informed, healthy, consenting) kidney donors are payed like $50,000. This could potentially find an equilibrium in the high supply and high demand of kidneys, where people who need a kidney can get better and people who have a kidney they are willing to donate can get compensation. It could be a lifesaving technocratic solution—depending on how we think of that same dilemma of if compensating kidney donors creates economic coercion.

On a personal level, while I have more thinking to do for sure, I feel pretty confident that I want to try to donate a kidney. I think I want to donate in next three years or so—but one thing that makes me consider waiting is if the long-shot idea of paying kidney donors might come to fruition in the next few decades. If I knew for sure the payment legislation will never come, I would very likely be willing to do the donation on account of the humanitarian risk vs. reward. However, compensation for something like that could really change my finances, so if it might be on the horizon maybe it’s better to wait until it comes. - Wilson

Hey uncoded_decimal! Great question. I don't know what the answer is--we'll get back to you!

To clear up one thing: none of us are currently in a challenge trial, as there are none taking place yet! We believe preparations for challenge trials need to start as quickly as possible. Then, if challenge trials will be useful (as we believe they will be), challenge trials can start immediately. --Wilson