Become a Creator today!Start creating today - Share your story with the world!
Start for free
00:00:00
00:00:01
COVID - 19 Ethics During A Pandemic
5 Plays5 years ago
In this episode of Critical Matters, we discuss ethical issues related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Our guest is Arthur L. Caplan, Ph.D. Dr. Caplan is the director of the Division of Medical Ethics at New York University Langone Medical Center and School of Medicine. He is the author and editor of 35 books and 750 peer-reviewed articles. Dr. Caplan is a recognized thought leader and expert in the field of medical ethics.
Additional Resources:
WHO – Guidance to Managing Ethical Issues in Infectious Disease Outbreaks: https://bit.ly/3bwhqOe
Ethics of Outbreaks Position Statement. Part 1: Therapies, Treatment Limitations, and Duty to Treat: https://bit.ly/2Vs8i7G
Ethics of Outbreaks Position Statement. Part 2: Family-Centered Care: https://bit.ly/3cQngun
Fair Allocation of Scarce Medical Resources in the Time of COVID-19: https://bit.ly/2VRX1fQ
Books Mentioned in this Episode:
Plato: Five Dialogues by Plato: https://amzn.to/3bum1Rf
Benjamin Franklin: An American Life by W. Isaacson: https://amzn.to/2VOpGTg
Poor Richard’s Almanac by B. Franklin: https://amzn.to/2XUQqnK
Recommended
Transcript
Introduction to 'Critical Matters' and Host Introduction
00:00:06
Speaker
Welcome to Critical Matters, a sound critical care podcast covering a broad range of topics related to the practice of intensive care medicine.
00:00:14
Speaker
Sound Critical Care provides comprehensive critical care programs to hospitals across the country.
00:00:20
Speaker
To learn more about our programs and career opportunities, visit www.soundphysicians.com.
00:00:27
Speaker
And now your host, Dr. Sergio Zanotti.
Ethical Issues in COVID-19 with Dr. Arthur L. Kaplan
00:00:32
Speaker
In today's episode of the podcast, we will discuss ethical issues related to the COVID-19 pandemic.
00:00:38
Speaker
We are very fortunate and much honored to have Dr. Arthur L. Kaplan as our guest today.
00:00:42
Speaker
Dr. Kaplan is Director of the Division of Medical Ethics at New York University Langone Medical Center and School of Medicine.
00:00:49
Speaker
He is the author or editor of 35 books and over 700 peer-reviewed articles, as well as a frequent commentator in the media on bioethical issues.
00:00:58
Speaker
Dr. Kaplan is a recognized thought leader and expert in medical ethics.
00:01:02
Speaker
Art, welcome to Critical Matters.
00:01:04
Speaker
Thank you so much for having me.
00:01:07
Speaker
I think that, obviously, there's been a lot going on in the last several months in our country.
00:01:13
Speaker
I mean, I know that you're in the epicenter in New York, and I'm sure that you've been talking about ethical issues related to the pandemic with a lot of people.
00:01:22
Speaker
So I really appreciate you making the time to talk with us today.
00:01:25
Speaker
But I wanted to start maybe with a very basic distinction and get your thoughts on the
00:01:30
Speaker
the differences between what's legal and what's moral, especially during a pandemic?
Ethics vs. Law During Pandemics
00:01:35
Speaker
Well, you know, the ethics usually arrives, if you will, first.
00:01:41
Speaker
We debate what's right to do, what's wrong to do.
00:01:44
Speaker
And then when we agree, we put it into law.
00:01:48
Speaker
So you might say that ethics precedes the law.
00:01:51
Speaker
And then ethics is always around to critique the law.
00:01:53
Speaker
We've had bad laws, immoral laws, laws that we had to change.
00:01:58
Speaker
And so ethicists are constantly probing and examining the law to see whether it might be unjust or might be violating basic human rights.
00:02:08
Speaker
So it is both kind of ahead of the game, first on the beaches activity, ethics, and then it becomes a sounding board to kind of reform the law as we go along.
00:02:20
Speaker
Remember, too, ethics is often defined by personal conscience.
00:02:27
Speaker
by professional groups that have agreed upon rules that they will follow.
00:02:32
Speaker
The law is put in place, if you will, by legislators reflecting popular will or opinion.
00:02:39
Speaker
But that opinion can sometimes stray.
00:02:41
Speaker
Let's just think in areas like civil rights where we had laws that were biased against groups and so on.
00:02:48
Speaker
So the law isn't always ethical, even though it is the law.
00:02:53
Speaker
And that's what I mean when I say the ethicists sometimes have to challenge it or sometimes the profession has to say, look, the law is pushing things in a direction that's not right for our profession.
00:03:03
Speaker
Think about trying to censor what doctors can say to patients about various topics.
00:03:09
Speaker
That's an example where the ethics doesn't square with what the law might say in a particular state, say, about discussing guns in the home or abortion or some other things that are legal.
Evolution of Ethical and Legal Issues in Health Crises
00:03:21
Speaker
to talk about, but a state might try to restrict speech.
00:03:26
Speaker
Absolutely.
00:03:26
Speaker
And I think that the other part that I think is very interesting is that as we progress in a health crisis, such as a pandemic, there are different stages that might alter not only the way we look at certain ethical issues, but also certain legal issues might be changed as things get more dire.
00:03:47
Speaker
Is that something that you can comment on?
00:03:52
Speaker
I think ethics evolves to context.
00:03:55
Speaker
The law is slow to change and often can't keep up.
00:03:59
Speaker
So that's a problem with the law.
00:04:01
Speaker
And then remember, too, there are situations where legislators and politicians and judges don't want to make the law.
00:04:07
Speaker
They steer away from controversial topics.
00:04:10
Speaker
You can think here about guidance on how to ration ventilators.
00:04:14
Speaker
Ethicists jumped in and had much to say about how best to approach that difficult subject.
00:04:20
Speaker
politicians, lawyers, legislators, not so much.
00:04:24
Speaker
They just didn't want to get into it.
00:04:25
Speaker
Yeah.
00:04:28
Speaker
And in terms of making decisions from an ethical standpoint, in terms of just some very basic principles for our audience, when you think about pandemics or a crisis like the one we're living right now, are there like basic tenets that are important?
00:04:44
Speaker
I know that some people have always argued kind of the John Stuart Mill approach
00:04:48
Speaker
the greatest good for the greatest people, as other people who might believe Emmanuel Cantin say every life is sacred.
00:04:53
Speaker
I mean, any thoughts in terms of how bioethicists think about this in general, specifically for pandemics?
Shift from Autonomy to Utilitarianism in Bioethics
00:04:59
Speaker
Yeah, so I think we normally are a little bit Kantian in our outlook, meaning we tend to try and respect the individual patient.
00:05:08
Speaker
We tend to try and do what their values and wishes are in ordinary circumstances.
00:05:14
Speaker
Patient autonomy, patient choice get a lot of weight.
00:05:18
Speaker
in driving care.
00:05:20
Speaker
In a pandemic, we shift over to much more utilitarian standards because we're trying to do what's best for the group, for the community, even in some sense for the population of the world.
00:05:31
Speaker
An individual autonomy has to yield.
00:05:34
Speaker
So were I to give instructions that if I'm dying, I want everything done for me, normally we would try to do what we can to respect that until we reach futility.
00:05:47
Speaker
But in a pandemic, you're sort of spreading resources around and you're thinking, I can't respect the do everything possible for me to the last minute because I need to shift resources to others who have a much better chance of doing well with them.
00:06:03
Speaker
So pandemics, I think, are more consequentialist or utilitarian and ordinary medical morality, much more individualistic and autonomy driven.
00:06:14
Speaker
And I think that it's also very interesting because
00:06:16
Speaker
That also plays in the way I think physicians treat patients without maybe thinking of it in a deep ethical sense, that we usually are very focused on the patient in front of us, like you said.
00:06:28
Speaker
And when things are normal, that's our modus operandi.
00:06:32
Speaker
When things get to a crisis and it's really out of control, kind of what happened in some hospitals, maybe in New York and Mobutin in Italy, it's a very different approach.
00:06:40
Speaker
But it seems that the middle is very messy.
00:06:43
Speaker
And I think it's very difficult sometimes for patients, for physicians and families to make that shift as we go along.
00:06:49
Speaker
Is that something that you've observed?
00:06:50
Speaker
I mean, in this pandemic?
00:06:53
Speaker
Absolutely, yes.
Ethics of Rationing Medical Resources
00:06:54
Speaker
So we're used to, well, let's put it this way.
00:06:57
Speaker
Over my career, I've spent a lot of time dealing with rationing because I've worked in transplant for more than three decades.
00:07:04
Speaker
We make rationing decisions there every day.
00:07:07
Speaker
People die every day because they can't get a scarce resource.
00:07:10
Speaker
I'm used to trying to think hard and
00:07:13
Speaker
about what rules are best with a scarce resource when you have many worthy candidates and many who might benefit, but you don't have enough hearts or livers or lungs or kidneys to help everyone with a cadaver donation.
00:07:28
Speaker
Obviously, one obligation there is to try and think about what individual patients want, but you're also saying, I've got this scarce resource.
00:07:37
Speaker
I have to maximize it.
00:07:39
Speaker
Some transplant surgeons will say, well, look, my patient failed.
00:07:42
Speaker
with their transplant and I want to get another organ.
00:07:45
Speaker
And we've set up the system so if we think a second transplant is just not going to work, even though the individual doc is fighting like crazy to get that next transplant to give their patient another chance, the system sometimes steps in and denies it.
00:08:01
Speaker
So that's a classic, if you will, challenge of the obligation to do what's best for my patient, which might be a retransplant versus a
00:08:11
Speaker
What's best for the overall population is to save the most lives, and we're going to discourage re-transplants in cases where there's been, say, acute rejection.
00:08:21
Speaker
And I think that when we walk into a pandemic like the one we're living, the numbers are logarithmically greater, and the exponential growth of number of patients obviously makes it even a more difficult situation, I'm sure, for everybody.
00:08:34
Speaker
Exactly.
00:08:35
Speaker
And, you know, there's also this additional factor of risk built in.
00:08:40
Speaker
Do you have enough protective gear?
00:08:42
Speaker
Even if you're wearing protective gear, if you're doing very dangerous intubations and so on, trying to split a ventilator, these kinds of things, even kidney dialysis, which can be dangerous.
00:08:53
Speaker
How do you weigh that?
00:08:54
Speaker
Would you take certain risks for your patient knowing they're not likely to survive, say an 87-year-old on a ventilator, that's a bad forecast, versus
00:09:04
Speaker
trying to shift resources to a 30-year-old who has a much better chance of survival and justifies perhaps exposure and risk if you don't have enough protective gear or even if you do have protective gear but you're still concerned that infection is a possibility.
00:09:21
Speaker
So you're weighing in a third factor, which normally isn't there.
00:09:24
Speaker
What's the risk to the healthcare provider of doing something?
00:09:28
Speaker
Absolutely.
00:09:30
Speaker
Art, as an ethicist, I mean, you've not only thought about rationing the transplant world, but you've probably thought about pandemics a lot more than most people who are listening to this podcast.
00:09:38
Speaker
What has been as expected with the COVID and what has been the least expected in your experience in the last several weeks?
00:09:47
Speaker
Well, I've had a chance to think about rationing with transplants.
00:09:52
Speaker
I was part of the WHO committee that thought about resource constraints with Ebola.
Ethical Response of Healthcare Providers
00:09:59
Speaker
And I've spent time running a committee that's been advising big pharma companies like Johnson & Johnson about how to give out drugs that are not yet approved by the FDA to desperately ill, dying people who can't get into a clinical trial.
00:10:13
Speaker
So a lot of experience in many ways in thinking about previous, if you will, demands on resources where supply just wasn't keeping up with or couldn't keep up with demand.
00:10:26
Speaker
What's left me surprised in this outbreak, first, I think we had a strong, virtuous response on the part of healthcare providers going in, facing risk, and saying, I'm going to do right by my patients.
00:10:40
Speaker
You know, that didn't have to happen.
00:10:42
Speaker
People could have called out sick.
00:10:43
Speaker
People could have said, I'm not facing that risk.
00:10:46
Speaker
I didn't see, I won't say I didn't see any of that, but I saw very little of that in every country.
00:10:51
Speaker
I think people can be proud that they're
00:10:56
Speaker
Doctors and nurses and technicians and food handlers and transporters went in there and said, we're healthcare providers.
00:11:04
Speaker
We're going to do right by our patients.
00:11:06
Speaker
We're going to help in this pandemic.
00:11:08
Speaker
I think in even the Ebola outbreak, there was panic on the part of many healthcare providers and they wouldn't do it.
00:11:15
Speaker
Second, I see something that disturbs me.
00:11:18
Speaker
In Ebola, we saw panic prescribing.
00:11:21
Speaker
People were using anything and everything to try and cure people.
00:11:26
Speaker
We tried to lay out rules and say, look, you've got to try experimental things in an organized way.
00:11:32
Speaker
I haven't seen that enough in the current pandemic.
00:11:35
Speaker
The president got up in the U.S. and said, you know, I like these anti-malarial drugs in combination.
00:11:42
Speaker
I think they work.
00:11:44
Speaker
All of a sudden, the entire supply of this drug is diverted over.
00:11:49
Speaker
to trying it out on people with no systematic organization, who knows what doses they got, when they got it, how sick they were, just throwing the kitchen sink in there.
00:11:59
Speaker
And I thought we weren't going to do that again once we'd learned from the Ebola outbreak that if you don't organize testing new agents in a systematic way, you're never going to know what's going on.
00:12:10
Speaker
Plus, you can do harm.
00:12:11
Speaker
And we saw some harm coming out of the
00:12:14
Speaker
misuse of these drugs, both in diverting them from people who were benefiting, people with lupus, for example, couldn't get this drug, and heart attacks and heart problems in older people who got the drug and then basically had to suspend the studies.
00:12:30
Speaker
Just one other quick area.
00:12:32
Speaker
I think people have been surprising to me a little bit that we focused on ventilators, ventilators, ventilators, and they're important.
00:12:40
Speaker
But I think most of the people on this podcast will know that if you need a ventilator, it's not a good sign.
00:12:45
Speaker
The outcomes are not great no matter who you are.
00:12:49
Speaker
But we didn't pay enough attention to rationing personnel and where would we deploy them best and how do we handle elective surgeries versus the need to staff up for acute emergencies.
00:13:00
Speaker
What should continue?
00:13:01
Speaker
What shouldn't?
00:13:02
Speaker
I saw a lot of yelling and screaming about pocketbook issues.
00:13:07
Speaker
That surprised me a little bit.
00:13:09
Speaker
Interesting.
00:13:10
Speaker
I think you touched on two things that we're going to dive a little bit deeper, but I want to start with basically physicians and healthcare workers.
00:13:17
Speaker
And if you could give us kind of your thoughts on the duty to serve in a pandemic, what guidance do we have?
00:13:24
Speaker
I know the AMA has talked about this in the past, and you mentioned, I mean, most healthcare providers have stepped up and really put themselves in the front lines.
00:13:33
Speaker
But tell us a little bit more in terms of how you think about the duty to serve from a bioethical standpoint.
00:13:40
Speaker
Yeah, well, we started talking a little bit about the difference between the law and ethics.
00:13:45
Speaker
Legally, I don't think you can compel somebody to face untoward risk, meaning go in there without adequate PPE or reusing a mask or reuse a mask that we attempted to clean by procedures that we don't really know will work or won't ruin the mask.
00:14:02
Speaker
It's one thing to say the average healthcare worker has to face a little more risk being around
00:14:08
Speaker
the flu or infectious agents.
00:14:11
Speaker
It's a different thing to say, we know that this virus is virulent, highly infective, and we don't have the proper equipment for you.
00:14:18
Speaker
Legally, it would be very hard to say, I'm going to fire you if you won't do that.
00:14:22
Speaker
And I know some people have been threatened with that in different parts of the world, but I don't think it would stick.
00:14:28
Speaker
It's just, it's more asking unusual risk or distorted risk than trying to enforce it.
00:14:37
Speaker
That said, ethically, I think the medical groups, nursing, medicine, have said patients first, put your patients' interests first.
00:14:46
Speaker
That has been part of the code of ethics for a long, long time in many, many specialties in medicine and in nursing.
00:14:53
Speaker
Also, by the way, in pharmacy.
00:14:56
Speaker
And there, I think the call is ethically to try and assume more risk because that's what a professional does.
00:15:02
Speaker
That's what a healthcare professional does.
00:15:04
Speaker
So I think ethically, there's a little more of a duty.
00:15:07
Speaker
Legally, no.
00:15:09
Speaker
I don't think you can enforce it in the same way.
00:15:12
Speaker
So you're really calling on people's moral vision to say, take the risk, go in there, go to a risky environment.
00:15:19
Speaker
Also, you're putting potentially loved ones at risk or people you live with.
00:15:24
Speaker
And they didn't sign up for that if you bring the virus home or you get infected.
00:15:29
Speaker
But I do think it's a question of ethics.
00:15:31
Speaker
And I think the profession has risen to
00:15:34
Speaker
all the healthcare workers to really commendable levels of bravery and, if you will, heroism on ethical grounds.
00:15:47
Speaker
No, and absolutely.
00:15:47
Speaker
And that's, I think, exactly what I have seen.
00:15:49
Speaker
I mean, we have, obviously, colleagues all over the country, and some areas got hit harder than others, but some of the things that we've heard are things that are unprecedented and that I've never heard or experienced in previous disasters at that level.
00:16:04
Speaker
What about the whole topic of lack of proper PPE?
00:16:12
Speaker
I think that also part of the problem here has been that there's been, on one hand, real supply chain disruptions, real surges in volumes that have made this very difficult.
Criticism of Government's COVID-19 Response
00:16:24
Speaker
But there's also been a tremendous amount of misinformation.
00:16:27
Speaker
And it's kind of like what people want, what they need, and what they have are not always aligned
00:16:34
Speaker
So how do you look at that in terms of proper PPE and where does that come into that duty to serve?
00:16:40
Speaker
Well, I think national government in the U.S. failed, let us down, did not have a supply, let the stockpile that was built up post-Ebola decline and rot away, shut down key CDC presence in other countries in office,
00:17:03
Speaker
The government under Trump has been particularly after the deep state thinking that's not what you need.
00:17:09
Speaker
But ironically, a plague is exactly where you need, quote unquote, the deep state, meaning CDC, NIH, FDA, the ability to ask manufacturers to shift quickly to making protective gear.
00:17:23
Speaker
We didn't have that fast enough.
00:17:25
Speaker
And it's not a state issue.
00:17:27
Speaker
Sometimes the federal government has kept saying it's a state issue and the state should go find their equipment.
00:17:33
Speaker
It's a federal issue.
00:17:34
Speaker
They're the ones who have the authority to step in and say, you start making shields, you start making gloves, you start making masks, and so on.
00:17:43
Speaker
So that is probably my number one criticism of how we've responded to this is inadequate protective gear.
00:17:52
Speaker
I see people stretching and trying, you know, we have people making masks at home.
00:17:57
Speaker
I saw companies locally just decide to switch over to making face guards.
00:18:04
Speaker
One area where PPE was particularly horrible, nursing homes, they had death pits because the staff is the only group that could be bringing the infection in.
00:18:15
Speaker
Got terrible numbers of people infected, very frail, and they didn't have equipment to do their job.
00:18:23
Speaker
The nursing home sector has always been the
00:18:25
Speaker
sort of poor child of healthcare, and it just showed up here again.
00:18:29
Speaker
So I know that's a long whine and a lot of complaining, but we really should have done better on PPE.
00:18:38
Speaker
And as long as I'm venting about that, we also should have done better on testing.
00:18:42
Speaker
Why we don't have testing as we speak today, still adequate to allow people to start to return to work, meaning we don't have quick turnaround testing of the
00:18:55
Speaker
same-day variety, spit testing, while we don't have more genetic testing, while we don't have more accurate serology testing.
00:19:03
Speaker
I think the federal government was in denial of this thing too long.
00:19:08
Speaker
Other countries did better, Taiwan, South Korea.
00:19:13
Speaker
They managed to test their way back to tamping down the epidemic faster by focusing their quarantine on
00:19:22
Speaker
So there's a lesson here for the future.
00:19:25
Speaker
We must always have an adequate reserve supply of gear to manage infectious diseases.
00:19:32
Speaker
We must always have a lab capacity to shift to different types of testing, whether it's for swine flu or Ebola or Zika or new coronavirus or whatever the heck is brewing out there, Marburg.
00:19:48
Speaker
Those things threaten the world and the cost of this
00:19:51
Speaker
towards any cost it would take to maintain that.
00:19:54
Speaker
And I think each hospital should be maintaining some sort of equipment reserve.
00:19:58
Speaker
This just-in-time idea that we'll maximize profits by getting our equipment only as we need it is not the best way for healthcare to operate, in my view.
00:20:07
Speaker
It's not the ethical way to be.
00:20:10
Speaker
Absolutely.
00:20:11
Speaker
And I think that, furthermore, I think that another change that is not, I think, a welcome change, I think it's just a sign of despair that you have talked about, is that
00:20:21
Speaker
I would imagine that in the next couple of months, a lot of physicians and nurses might procure their own N95s in mass to keep it just in case something happens again, which again is something that we have never even thought about in the past.
00:20:35
Speaker
Yeah.
00:20:35
Speaker
And, you know, I think there's been some warnings, I'll admit, having been around some of the response to prior infectious disease outbreaks in Africa or Zika, which mainly went into South America.
00:20:52
Speaker
Though we're not paying attention here, you know, again, people say, well, who could have anticipated this?
00:20:56
Speaker
Who could have known?
00:20:58
Speaker
There were warnings coming that we needed to be ready for infectious disease outbreaks, given what had happened, but they just didn't register.
00:21:06
Speaker
I have to say, long-term planning has not been a great feature of our public health planning, of our hospital supply planning.
00:21:17
Speaker
And we've got to take that lesson home and start to really say, you know, we get ready for things like a big train accident or a terrorism attack, and we do some planning about triaging and handling an explosion or a chemical plant explosion.
00:21:34
Speaker
We have to really also add in the infectious diseases.
00:21:37
Speaker
In this day and age, for a variety of reasons, they're constantly going to be there.
00:21:42
Speaker
I'm even concerned that
00:21:44
Speaker
that we got to really build up a resupply in case this thing comes back in a big way on rebounds later in the year.
00:21:51
Speaker
And I think, like you said, people say, who could have predicted?
00:21:56
Speaker
And actually, anybody who thinks about this or reads history, I think would feel very comfortable saying that the biggest immediate threat to people and economies is a pandemic.
00:22:08
Speaker
I agree.
00:22:09
Speaker
I agree.
00:22:10
Speaker
You know, I'll just say personally, I know I've written...
00:22:15
Speaker
say in 2015, 2016, about the need to get ready for this, the failure not to take infectious disease outbreaks seriously, the notion even that we have in America that somehow the oceans isolate us, we're kind of fortress America, we're not going to get the problems that beset other parts of the world.
00:22:35
Speaker
And it's sort of, you know, did anybody remember like airplanes and cruise ships and the fact that a disease that's in the
00:22:44
Speaker
Sierra Leone one day can be over here in 24 hours.
00:22:48
Speaker
We're planning as if it was a 19th century, and if a disease broke out, we'll hold the boats in the harbor until we figure out who's got typhoid.
00:22:59
Speaker
I agree.
Misinformation and Non-scientific Treatments During COVID-19
00:23:00
Speaker
So the other topic that you had touched on is one of the surprises related to treatment during the pandemic, and specifically during COVID-19.
00:23:09
Speaker
And I wanted to talk about two areas within treatment.
00:23:13
Speaker
One is that you already mentioned, but I wanted to expand a little bit further is with this pandemic, and I think what's unique about maybe COVID-19 that we've never seen before is the infodemic associated with it.
00:23:25
Speaker
Like every single minute there's something new being shared, viralized, posted.
00:23:30
Speaker
The quality of what's being shared is like very, very low from a scientific standpoint.
00:23:36
Speaker
But people seem obviously to be buying this magical thinking and snake oil and everybody wants a solution.
00:23:43
Speaker
And I have seen colleagues giving therapies with very little data, which, again, in some situations might be ethically appropriate, like you said, in Ebola in some situations.
00:23:58
Speaker
But what worries me is that there seems to be also a lot of research going on without any science, without any documentation, but also without any discussion with patients and families about risk.
00:24:10
Speaker
Could you comment a little bit more on what you're seeing and how you think about this particular issue of using all these medications that really are at the best experimental in a widespread use?
00:24:21
Speaker
Well, you know, what's going on is what I call panic prescribing.
00:24:25
Speaker
It's basically saying, I don't know what to do.
00:24:27
Speaker
Somebody told me that one of these antiviral drugs might work or one of these...
00:24:34
Speaker
Things that stop cytokine storms might work, and I'll try that.
00:24:37
Speaker
Or maybe convalescent plasma might help.
00:24:42
Speaker
Or I've totaled up, there are well over 200 different agents that are being proposed by people to help either kill the virus or overturn some of the side effects caused by the virus.
00:24:57
Speaker
People are looking at things that might stop you from seroconverting if you get near the virus all the way out to what can I do if the person's dying right in front of me on a ventilator?
00:25:09
Speaker
Can I throw something at them?
00:25:11
Speaker
No one ever learned anything by panic prescribing, ever.
00:25:17
Speaker
You just don't know what's going on.
00:25:19
Speaker
So even if you had something that worked,
00:25:22
Speaker
If you don't write down how sick the patient was, when you gave it, what the dose was, how frequently you gave it, how are we going to know either that it didn't work or that if you just gave more of it, it might have worked?
00:25:34
Speaker
And I'm not calling for waiting until we have full randomized placebo-controlled trials.
00:25:42
Speaker
By the way, we may see some of that with the vaccines because giving a vaccine out to the world is going to require
00:25:48
Speaker
a very high safety level, and some pretty solid demonstration of efficacy.
00:25:53
Speaker
But for therapy efforts, rescue efforts, salvage therapies, if we don't compare A to B to C and write down what it is we're doing, we're lost.
00:26:03
Speaker
We saw that in Ebola.
00:26:05
Speaker
People were throwing the kitchen sink at Ebola patients, and we never figured out until the thing was almost burnt out the fact that there were some drugs that helped a little, and most things didn't do anything.
00:26:18
Speaker
And that relates also to the consent aspect.
00:26:20
Speaker
There's no excuse, none, for not getting minimal informed consent when you're trying a novel agent on somebody.
00:26:26
Speaker
Even if you're using an approved drug for a different purpose, you should tell the patient or the patient's surrogate that that's going to happen.
00:26:35
Speaker
You should absolutely tell someone that you're going to try an experimental agent and get their permission.
00:26:40
Speaker
If they can't give it, then a surrogate is usually available to do it.
00:26:44
Speaker
So,
00:26:46
Speaker
Suspending ethics in the middle of a pandemic, there's no cause for that.
00:26:50
Speaker
There's no reason for that.
00:26:52
Speaker
Even if you have to do it retrospectively and say, you know, I couldn't find anybody and I wanted to try and save your loved one.
00:26:57
Speaker
Okay.
00:26:58
Speaker
We have retrospective consent in emergency situations.
00:27:01
Speaker
We've created informed consent in the ER.
00:27:05
Speaker
You know, we understand the ethics side that you can't always
00:27:09
Speaker
get a consent on the spot.
00:27:11
Speaker
Maybe someone's in there with an emergency and no relatives and no family and no one, but then you do it after the fact.
00:27:17
Speaker
So I do think abandoning the informed consent aspect is wrong.
00:27:23
Speaker
And also I think it's wrong not to report what you're doing to the research ethics committees or IRBs as they're called, just to let them know, again, you're not seeking approval.
00:27:33
Speaker
You're just coming after the fact and saying, I tried this, it was experimental.
00:27:37
Speaker
and I'm just notifying the IRB, they can help keep records too so that we can learn.
00:27:42
Speaker
Look, in a pandemic, the game is obviously to help someone with something.
00:27:49
Speaker
But if we don't organize it, if we don't do it in a systematic way, if we don't record what we're doing, how are we ever going to advance?
00:27:57
Speaker
We're going to miss the things that helped, and we're going to use things that maybe hurt or tip people over.
00:28:03
Speaker
I think, just for one example, those that
00:28:06
Speaker
the drug that President Trump loves, the anti-malarials, not only did it divert the supply away from people who were benefiting from that drug, say who had lupus, it was using a drug in older populations who were prone to heart problems.
00:28:22
Speaker
They weren't in the sample that led to the drug being approved originally.
00:28:27
Speaker
It hadn't been given there.
00:28:29
Speaker
And we saw a number of countries have to stop
00:28:33
Speaker
their administration of that drug because they were giving people heart attacks and heart problems.
00:28:40
Speaker
Good intentions are great, but they shouldn't substitute for science.
00:28:46
Speaker
Yeah, and I think that you touched on, I mean, not only the substitution for science, but the substitution of appropriate ethics.
00:28:51
Speaker
And then I think that the one thing that I always worry as being part of a large group and making recommendations that affect a lot of patients is that
00:29:01
Speaker
Individual decisions with patients that are taken in the right way are different than saying everybody should do this.
00:29:07
Speaker
And then if you have harm, you've potentiated that harm by thousands of patients.
00:29:12
Speaker
And I think that the magnitude of that in a pandemic is something that people cannot take lightly.
00:29:17
Speaker
Specifically, I wanted to use an example that I see in critical care and just, I mean, get a little bit more of your thoughts.
00:29:23
Speaker
I mean, you've touched about it.
00:29:24
Speaker
already on the ethical needs to get that informed consent.
00:29:27
Speaker
But a drug that a lot of people are utilizing is the IL-6 inhibitors, which are drugs that originally were studied in septic shock with the same arguments that they're trying to use them in COVID, the cytokine storm and all that.
00:29:41
Speaker
And when they were studied, it didn't really work.
00:29:44
Speaker
And then they find their way into rheumatology as biological agents that do work for some diseases.
00:29:50
Speaker
But what's very interesting is that in current practice,
00:29:54
Speaker
If you're going to use an IL-6 inhibitor for a rheumatology patient, I know that in some places they do it under video consent.
00:30:05
Speaker
In other places, so they record the consent.
00:30:07
Speaker
In other places, they do it under written informed consent.
00:30:10
Speaker
And the reason is that these drugs have very powerful infectious disease complications that can be lethal.
00:30:15
Speaker
So that's a standard of care for patients who have approved indications and are not in the hospital.
00:30:21
Speaker
How can we walk away from that in people who are critically ill with this new disease?
00:30:26
Speaker
And I know that people have given this drug without getting that type of consent.
00:30:30
Speaker
What are your thoughts on that?
00:30:32
Speaker
Yeah, I'm just going to repeat.
00:30:33
Speaker
I think you must get consent.
00:30:35
Speaker
It's more, if you will, a notification.
00:30:38
Speaker
We both know, and most people listening to this will know, that people aren't going to say no.
00:30:43
Speaker
They're going to say, okay, try something.
00:30:45
Speaker
They hope.
00:30:46
Speaker
They wish.
00:30:47
Speaker
They put their faith in the doc and the remedy.
00:30:51
Speaker
It's psychologically understandable.
00:30:53
Speaker
If you're drowning, you'll take anything as a life preserver, piece of wood, anything.
00:30:59
Speaker
But sometimes you grab something that could hurt you, might be sharp edged or will just sink.
00:31:07
Speaker
So I think you might say what we want to do is notify people when we've used it.
00:31:12
Speaker
And then the other reason for consent is it's another way to track what the heck is going on.
00:31:18
Speaker
You start to have records that, you know, we used it here and we used it on this person.
00:31:22
Speaker
We tried it on an 87-year-old who had three underlying diseases.
00:31:26
Speaker
We tried it on a 30-year-old who didn't have any underlying diseases and seemed to have a very boisterous immune response.
00:31:35
Speaker
Part of the way to record all that is to keep tabs on the ethics end of it by recording the consents.
00:31:41
Speaker
So more information, even in a crisis, even when time is tight,
00:31:47
Speaker
and people are stressed and the workforce is overworked, that's the time to double down on trying to record what's happening.
00:31:55
Speaker
We want to make sure we're not making errors.
00:31:57
Speaker
We want to make sure we're not exposing people continuously to things that are tipping them over.
00:32:03
Speaker
You know the old rule.
00:32:05
Speaker
If a person gets better, it must be the drug I gave them.
00:32:08
Speaker
If the person dies, it must be the underlying disease that kills them, not the drug.
00:32:12
Speaker
And that's common.
00:32:13
Speaker
It's psychologically, again, understandable.
00:32:17
Speaker
but it's what medicine has to overcome in a plague if we're gonna advance.
00:32:23
Speaker
Absolutely.
00:32:24
Speaker
And I think that you kind of walked into the next topic I had regarding treatment, which is we obviously would benefit as society if we got good information of what works and what doesn't work and what causes harm and what causes benefit.
00:32:39
Speaker
And the best way to do that is through as rigorous as possible science, but we also have to balance that with the needs to do this
00:32:47
Speaker
in a rapid way while we have the patients coming at us at such a rapid pace.
00:32:52
Speaker
But what are the ethical issues regarding doing research?
00:32:55
Speaker
Because like you said, I have been part of research protocols in the past, and for a lot of these protocols, getting consent is not always easy.
00:33:02
Speaker
But I would imagine that if I were to approach any family member or patient with an experimental drug for COVID-19, they would just, before I even start, say, where do I sign?
00:33:11
Speaker
What are the ethical issues of doing ethically sound, rigorous science,
00:33:17
Speaker
in the midst of a pandemic such as this one?
00:33:20
Speaker
Well, sometimes I think people equate getting informed consent with getting legal immunity if things go wrong.
00:33:26
Speaker
I would not worry about that in a pandemic.
00:33:28
Speaker
For example, New York State passed a law providing immunity for going outside standard of care because they understood that more risks and more deviations from standard of care were going to happen in a pandemic, particularly if things got overly stressed.
00:33:45
Speaker
in a particular hospital setting.
00:33:48
Speaker
So I don't worry about legal liability.
00:33:50
Speaker
If someone wants to sue you after the fact for trying something that produced an adverse outcome, I'm going to say good luck to them in court because they're not going to get far.
00:33:59
Speaker
People understand desperate situations require desperate measures.
00:34:04
Speaker
So the reason you want to get the consent is not so much to respect the patient's choice because I agree.
00:34:11
Speaker
People are going to say, okay,
00:34:12
Speaker
If you throw anything at them, they'll try it.
00:34:14
Speaker
I don't think many people are going to say no.
00:34:16
Speaker
I can't imagine anybody will say no if a doctor comes in and says, I think this might help.
00:34:21
Speaker
Let's try it.
00:34:23
Speaker
But what we want to do is keep a record of what the heck is going on.
00:34:26
Speaker
So think more notification and record keeping.
00:34:30
Speaker
I gave it to Mr. X. Permission was impossible to obtain at the time.
00:34:35
Speaker
I'm going to get that later.
00:34:38
Speaker
Mr. X was an 87-year-old with three underlying diseases.
00:34:41
Speaker
He had no relatives around.
00:34:43
Speaker
He was on a vent and had been on for four days.
00:34:46
Speaker
That's it.
00:34:46
Speaker
Let's keep that side of the record keeping going, partly for the science.
00:34:51
Speaker
Remember, good ethics, good science mix.
00:34:56
Speaker
It isn't just that who cares about what's going on in a desperate situation.
00:35:02
Speaker
You care more
00:35:04
Speaker
because you're trying very hard to learn when you can't do the usual clinical trials, the usual controlled studies.
00:35:11
Speaker
You're basically trying to do either patient observation or adaptive trials, testing A against B against C and then dropping A if nothing seems to happen and doing them for shorter periods of time and having less evidence, but at least you got something.
00:35:27
Speaker
Use the ethics to let that happen.
00:35:31
Speaker
Absolutely.
00:35:32
Speaker
And I think that the other issue that I think sometimes gets obscured in these situations is that there is also a lot of other agendas going on in terms of what's being published, what's being proposed.
00:35:45
Speaker
I know that for some companies, if it seems that they have a promising drug, all of a sudden there could be benefits in their stock, even though there's maybe no real proof that that is true.
00:35:57
Speaker
I also think that from a scientific perspective,
00:36:00
Speaker
We've always been very, in academia, very heavy on the interests and biases that pharma might have in the industry.
00:36:07
Speaker
But there's also investigator agendas, and people are publishing low-quality stuff, sending tons of letters to the New England Journal of Medicine.
00:36:17
Speaker
I think that I saw one that was really remarkable because it had described one patient out of China with one cardiopathy issue.
00:36:26
Speaker
but the paper was a letter, it had 32 authors.
00:36:29
Speaker
I mean, what's going on here, right?
00:36:33
Speaker
So I think a couple of things also need to be kept in mind.
00:36:36
Speaker
Look, I lived through Ebola.
00:36:39
Speaker
Every antiviral agent known to humankind was trotted out and touted, some by people who had a financial interest.
00:36:46
Speaker
They wanted to sell their drug, and they didn't really care.
00:36:49
Speaker
Obviously, they hoped it would work.
00:36:51
Speaker
But if they could get you to buy a lot of it and administer it, they were coming out way ahead.
00:36:55
Speaker
Let's not forget that in addition to science, there are different people, investors and others who have financial goals that they hope something will get picked up and used by a lot of people.
00:37:08
Speaker
And then there are just outright quack people and hucksters and frauds.
00:37:13
Speaker
I think the first publication that came out of France about the anti-malarial drugs was retracted as bogus.
00:37:20
Speaker
And that might have been
00:37:22
Speaker
put out there by someone with good motives, but maybe not the best researcher, or maybe they got sloppy.
00:37:29
Speaker
So there's, if you will, money, there's error, hopeful observation, and then there's just quackster stuff.
00:37:38
Speaker
People come in and say, try this, try that.
00:37:41
Speaker
I saw that if you drink bleach or diluted bleach, it will help me.
00:37:45
Speaker
That's all over the internet.
00:37:46
Speaker
People are yakking on about use vitamins in big doses, as I always do, by the way, whenever there's a virus, like the virus cares about vitamins.
00:37:55
Speaker
There are many claims about immune boosters.
00:37:57
Speaker
So in sorting through this maze of claims, you need to first make sure you ask a patient, are you taking something that you saw on the internet?
00:38:08
Speaker
You may want to get them to stop drinking silver solution.
00:38:11
Speaker
That might not be the best thing to be doing.
00:38:15
Speaker
And then, again, we've got to have more systematic assessment of what's going on because you can't just trust somebody from a bio company or a startup saying, hey, I got this great antiviral.
00:38:28
Speaker
It showed real activity against the virus in vitro, right, in a dish.
00:38:33
Speaker
I'm going to tell you, like that paper that came out of China, I got one from China that said they tried a drug, and it showed that the drug had real effect in killing the virus in a lab study.
Warnings Against Bad Science in Pandemics
00:38:45
Speaker
And then we looked at the dose that was being used, and it was about 300 times the weight of a human being.
00:38:51
Speaker
There's no drug that won't show some effect against the virus at some dose.
00:38:58
Speaker
So, again, you've got to watch out for bad science, hype-y science, crackpot science, and financially driven science.
00:39:09
Speaker
And so we've got to lean back hard on trying to stay organized and not just panicking,
00:39:15
Speaker
in the middle of either this crisis or should the virus hopefully not recur.
00:39:20
Speaker
Yeah, I think that clearly, I mean, not only like the panic prescribing or panic-based medicine, but social media-based medicine has also, I think, taken flight.
00:39:31
Speaker
And it's amazing how many colleagues just post and repost things that they see on social media as being science.
00:39:38
Speaker
And that is a little bit disconcerting and scary when so many people are really dying and at risk.
00:39:45
Speaker
Yeah, the only thing you want to be reposting, I think, are opinion pieces.
00:39:49
Speaker
They're fine and you can criticize them or agree with them and that sort of thing.
00:39:54
Speaker
Yeah, but not as science.
00:39:58
Speaker
I hate it when somebody says, I heard that there was a study out of Sweden where 10 people did X. It's like, oh, if you don't have the paper, don't repeat that.
00:40:09
Speaker
If you want to say, I saw Art Kaplan's opinion piece and it struck me as exceedingly stupid,
00:40:14
Speaker
And here's why.
00:40:15
Speaker
You can retweet that.
00:40:17
Speaker
I agree.
00:40:18
Speaker
So the last part of our conversation, I wanted to go into a bit of the rationing of critical care.
Ethical Decisions in Rationing Critical Care
00:40:25
Speaker
And like you, we talked a little bit at the beginning.
00:40:28
Speaker
Most people are very in tune into this right now related to ventilators.
00:40:33
Speaker
But like you said, I mean, we've been rationing resources for decades with transplants.
00:40:38
Speaker
And people do die because they cannot get access to an organ because they don't have enough.
00:40:42
Speaker
But the two areas that I wanted you to give us your thoughts on is first is the rationing of other types of care because of potential risk for healthcare providers.
00:40:54
Speaker
And I think that specifically how that plays into cardiac arrest and thoughts that people have talked about, well, I mean, should we code these patients, not code these patients?
00:41:04
Speaker
Does it depend on their success, potential for success, et cetera?
00:41:09
Speaker
But just, I mean, maybe we could talk at that first and then talk about the scarcity of resources if you can.
00:41:15
Speaker
Well, the policies that I've seen, and I will also say that I've contributed to a little bit, including at my own NYU Langone Health System, you face the question if someone were to come in, in a hypothetical scenario, and into the ER and get triaged out saying, we don't have enough ventilators or we don't have enough dialysis,
00:41:38
Speaker
This person isn't going to make it relative to others.
00:41:42
Speaker
We're not going to be able to do that.
00:41:45
Speaker
Should we then automatically DNR them and say, if they then arrest, we're not going to put risk and resources into that person because they're not coming back due to resource constraint, let's say, to the kind of technological support they might need.
00:42:03
Speaker
I support that.
00:42:04
Speaker
I think you may have to do some unilateral DNRs in a complete crisis where you say, I can't discuss this or I'm not waiting for patient permission.
00:42:14
Speaker
If you're not going to be eligible for a vent or dialysis and a bed in the ICU, then there's no point resuscitating you because where are you going from there?
00:42:24
Speaker
We've hit futility and we've hit it earlier.
00:42:27
Speaker
Similarly, let's say you're failing on high-tech support
00:42:32
Speaker
either because you had the new coronavirus or you're just failing, as people do, from other terrible injuries or diseases or heart attacks or whatever.
00:42:43
Speaker
I think if you're resource constrained there, you may decide to stop care and not do the usual resuscitation efforts you might try because you know that there are, let's say, 1 in 10,000 chances of doing anything, and even the thing that you might produce might only give days
00:43:02
Speaker
hours more function.
00:43:04
Speaker
So while in ordinary circumstances we might say we're going to call the code and stop only when we've tried three, four times to resuscitate, I can imagine in dire circumstances saying in the ICU, this person just isn't flourishing.
00:43:21
Speaker
The experienced ICU person looks at them and says they're never going to recover.
00:43:25
Speaker
What is the point of risking further exposure?
00:43:29
Speaker
and futile use of scarce equipment and protective gear, let's stop now and we'll stop sooner than we would have normally because we know we've reached futility sooner.
00:43:40
Speaker
So those are really hugely troubling and awful ethical scenarios, both the, if you will, unilateral DNR off to sending over to palliative care and giving up perhaps sooner than one might have under
00:43:57
Speaker
normal circumstances with some resource abundance.
00:44:00
Speaker
But I think both make moral sense if you need the resources, so to speak, and you're trying to control healthcare worker exposure and burnout.
00:44:10
Speaker
So those are scenarios that I would argue that's not business as usual.
00:44:15
Speaker
And I think that that's also a very important point that when you have a pandemic worldwide, you might be, let's say, in Texas,
00:44:26
Speaker
and you're seeing what's happening in New York, and you're seeing what's happening in Italy, and that informs the way people start thinking, but the reality is it can't inform the way you start acting because your situation is not the same.
00:44:38
Speaker
You have not reached that crisis level yet, right?
00:44:41
Speaker
Yeah, you know, it's funny.
00:44:43
Speaker
A number of places in the U.S. and Canada, I've seen their rationing policies, but some of them did not rule them out.
00:44:52
Speaker
When you make a policy,
00:44:54
Speaker
The next step is to train people in it and let them discuss it and accommodate to it.
00:44:59
Speaker
You know, you don't want to just say Tuesday at three o'clock, we start rationing everybody on board.
00:45:04
Speaker
You know, you want to discuss it and teach it.
00:45:07
Speaker
It takes at least a little bit of leadership and so forth to do it.
00:45:12
Speaker
But we never actually got to it.
00:45:14
Speaker
Even at NYU, we were stretched then.
00:45:17
Speaker
We had a lot of people working together.
00:45:20
Speaker
extraordinary hours, but we didn't get to rationing the ventilators.
00:45:24
Speaker
And I don't think that happened in almost any place that I know of.
00:45:29
Speaker
There were places that get overwhelmed with patients and had to move them because they just didn't have beds.
00:45:36
Speaker
But you don't want to roll your rationing policy out because you don't want people to use it before they need to.
00:45:40
Speaker
You know what I mean?
00:45:41
Speaker
It's sort of, there's a fear that if you release it, then people are going to say, well, you know, I'm not going to try to save this guy.
00:45:47
Speaker
He's too old.
00:45:48
Speaker
He doesn't meet the rationing criteria.
00:45:50
Speaker
And you're sort of like, no, no, no, we still have enough resources, we don't have to ration yet.
00:45:55
Speaker
So the most immoral thing you can do is ration when you don't have to.
00:45:58
Speaker
And I think that led some hospital systems around the country to not release the rationing policies for fear that it would trigger, I'll call it premature rationing, you know, unneeded rationing, and you don't want that.
00:46:13
Speaker
Yeah, and I think that's a very valuable point, and I think worth, I mean, reemphasizing
00:46:17
Speaker
because I think that people, obviously as they see what's going on, are very geared in going that route.
Timing in Rationing Policy Implementation
00:46:24
Speaker
But if you do it, like you said, at the wrong time, which is too early, clearly that presents even a bigger ethical dilemma and a moral issue.
00:46:35
Speaker
Yeah, yep, absolutely.
00:46:38
Speaker
So I know that we're coming up on time, Art, but are there any general recommendations?
00:46:45
Speaker
I know that, obviously,
00:46:46
Speaker
There's a lot of issues when if you were to decide a rationing protocol or policy, there's a lot of things that are very important in terms of using obviously sound, ethical basis, understanding what community, what the community believes in.
00:47:02
Speaker
I think it's very important also.
00:47:04
Speaker
Furthermore, putting things, the decisions outside of the hands of the people who are actually taking care of the patients is also probably very important.
00:47:12
Speaker
But could you just give us like maybe a couple of pointers in terms of what are
00:47:16
Speaker
basic things that should be present there?
00:47:19
Speaker
Well, I'll say this.
00:47:20
Speaker
Look, first, let's not abandon core ethics.
00:47:23
Speaker
Even though we're starting to, in a plague, practice with an eye toward the community, not just the individual, the individual still deserves the respect of knowing what's going on or their surrogate if they're too impaired, either by cognitive impairments if they're elderly or just because the sickness makes it difficult for them to communicate.
00:47:45
Speaker
But we shouldn't ever abandon that right to know and respect for the dignity of the person to know what's going on, whether it's treatment or research or desperation.
00:47:55
Speaker
We should always still respect that principle.
00:47:58
Speaker
I think it isn't just a matter of the law.
00:48:02
Speaker
It's a matter of respect ethically for dignity.
00:48:05
Speaker
There's not much we may be able to do in terms of actually having cures.
00:48:10
Speaker
And people may always say yes to whatever it is in a dire situation.
00:48:15
Speaker
that people are proposing to try on them, but I still think there's intrinsic merit in having that conversation, that permission, that consent.
00:48:26
Speaker
It shows dignity to people, many of whom may not make it.
00:48:30
Speaker
So we can at least give them that.
00:48:33
Speaker
I think palliative care and support, emotional support, very important for patients and families.
00:48:38
Speaker
If we say there's no more we could do,
00:48:41
Speaker
have to quickly tell them that we're going to be there for them.
00:48:44
Speaker
You know, in a lot of places, people have had to die alone.
00:48:48
Speaker
They can't get in their family members or anyone because the unit is infected.
00:48:55
Speaker
I'd like to see people reassured that we'll have someone there, nurse, chaplain, in protective gear to hold hands, talk.
00:49:04
Speaker
If possible, we should start to set up
00:49:06
Speaker
electronic ways for families to be present with iPads and cell phones and so on.
00:49:12
Speaker
I don't think we did that enough.
00:49:13
Speaker
I think we should do that more.
00:49:14
Speaker
No one should have to die alone if the technology will help us work it through.
00:49:22
Speaker
I think understanding that the usual ethic of fight for my patient and be the best advocate I can be gets shifted in a pandemic or a plague to I have to take into account
00:49:35
Speaker
the best use of scarce resources.
00:49:37
Speaker
Now, happily, hopefully, we don't get to that.
00:49:40
Speaker
We saw some of it in Italy where the system got overwhelmed.
00:49:44
Speaker
We may still yet see it in some other parts of the world, but it's keeping in mind that it's not wrong to shift focus the plague, the pandemic, whatever it's caused, forces ethical adjustment in order to do the best you can now, not just for your patients,
00:50:04
Speaker
but for many patients.
00:50:06
Speaker
And that's hard because we've spent so much time stressing and teaching the importance of being a good advocate.
00:50:12
Speaker
But I do think in public health emergencies or in disasters, we have to change the ethic toward doing the best we can for the most people we can.
00:50:24
Speaker
That's, as I say, I understand that's difficult since I
00:50:27
Speaker
Myself, I've spent many, many years trying to advocate good advocacy as best you can do for your patient, even with fiscal constraints or resource constraints in ordinary times.
00:50:38
Speaker
But I do think that has to adjust.
00:50:42
Speaker
And the last thing I'd say is I think we should praise and support our peers.
00:50:47
Speaker
There are people working their butts off.
00:50:50
Speaker
There are people taking risks.
00:50:52
Speaker
There are people not just...
00:50:55
Speaker
at the bedside but supporting the infrastructure, making the food, cleaning the rooms, doing the laundry, affording security, transporting people.
00:51:08
Speaker
We got to bolster each, help one another, bolster one another.
00:51:11
Speaker
I try whenever I can in the hospital setting to tell people how much I admire what they're doing.
00:51:19
Speaker
I have many of my students that are now out there on the front lines and I try to encourage them and reinforce
00:51:25
Speaker
their bravery and their selflessness, and even the people listening to this who've been out there doing things.
00:51:30
Speaker
It's important to say I appreciate it.
00:51:33
Speaker
I admire it.
00:51:35
Speaker
I hope that if you're feeling anguished or overwhelmed that you seek out some support.
00:51:41
Speaker
There's nothing wrong with that.
00:51:44
Speaker
It's tough, tough duty in a miserable situation.
00:51:49
Speaker
And so support is something we should all extend and something we should seek when needed.
00:51:57
Speaker
Absolutely.
Supporting Healthcare Workers During the Pandemic
00:51:58
Speaker
And I think that I really appreciate those words, Art.
00:52:00
Speaker
And usually, I mean, we could probably go on for a lot more, but I want to be respectful of your time.
00:52:06
Speaker
So maybe we could close the podcast with some questions that are unrelated to COVID-19.
00:52:12
Speaker
Would that be okay?
00:52:13
Speaker
Sure.
00:52:15
Speaker
So what book or books have influenced you the most or what book have you gifted most often to others?
00:52:22
Speaker
Two books.
00:52:23
Speaker
Um,
00:52:24
Speaker
One, I'm a big fan of Socrates, the philosopher Socrates, Plato's dialogues, or Socrates talking to people about many different issues.
00:52:34
Speaker
And I am a fan of Socrates.
00:52:37
Speaker
You know, I have a philosophy degree, and I think that his model of going into the marketplace out in public and trying to do ethics in an applied way is really admirable.
00:52:49
Speaker
Plus,
00:52:51
Speaker
I think the Platonic Dialogues, which are really about what his teacher Socrates said and did, there's just a lot of wisdom there.
00:52:59
Speaker
If you want, I'll cheat and say I sometimes recommend reading a little Aristotle too.
00:53:03
Speaker
As classic insights into tough ethical dilemmas, Aristotle's very good on virtues and calling upon people to be brave but not stupid, for example.
00:53:14
Speaker
So he doesn't think that taking any risk is...
00:53:18
Speaker
necessarily brave, but he does a good job of carving out what's courageous versus what's foolhardy.
00:53:25
Speaker
And then I'm a fan of Ben Franklin.
00:53:27
Speaker
He's one of my heroes, a scientist, a legislator, an inventor, and I like his biography and I like his writings also.
00:53:38
Speaker
There's this sort of poor Richard's almanac kind of summary of
00:53:44
Speaker
extortations to be good.
00:53:46
Speaker
And I think Franklin was brilliant and underappreciated.
00:53:49
Speaker
We tend to think of him as kind of a chubby figure getting involved in signing the Constitution.
00:53:53
Speaker
But he was a deep, deep thinker and almost, I'm going to say, a pioneering American philosopher, very American.
00:54:01
Speaker
So he speaks to our times.
00:54:04
Speaker
Absolutely.
00:54:04
Speaker
I do polymath.
00:54:05
Speaker
And I think that with the dialogues, Plato's dialogues, I agree.
00:54:08
Speaker
I think that I am particularly fond of reading a
00:54:12
Speaker
stoic philosophers and especially during these times i i do find that it's very interesting that one of my favorite reads is meditation which was written during a plague and uh that lasted 13 years so a lot longer than covet but uh but clearly a lot of a lot of uh truth to power and also a lot of things that i think have to be true because they can send time right
00:54:39
Speaker
So I have to excuse myself because I just looked at the time and I got another call coming.
00:54:47
Speaker
That's a class of mine.
00:54:49
Speaker
So I'm going to have to jump.
00:54:51
Speaker
Absolutely.
00:54:52
Speaker
So thank you so much for your time, Art.
00:54:55
Speaker
And I really hope that you stay safe and hope that we have a chance to talk again soon.
00:54:59
Speaker
Very good.
00:54:59
Speaker
And if you get this on a link, send it to me.
00:55:02
Speaker
I'll post it.
00:55:04
Speaker
Absolutely.
00:55:04
Speaker
Thank you very much.
00:55:05
Speaker
All righty.
00:55:06
Speaker
Take care.
00:55:07
Speaker
Bye-bye.
00:55:09
Speaker
Thank you for listening to Critical Matters, a Sound Critical Care podcast.
00:55:14
Speaker
Make sure to subscribe to Critical Matters on Apple or Google Podcasts and share with your network.
00:55:20
Speaker
Sound Critical Care is transforming the way critical care is provided in hospitals across the country.
00:55:25
Speaker
To learn more, visit www.soundphysicians.com.