Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre
That’s not how I read it. I read it as undermining the cheaper vaccine because.
A. Other vaccine producers, many of which are domestic pharmaceutical companies within the EU and other nations o/s of it, are way behind the curve. So any delay that they can put on the use of the AZ vaccine will help them catch up and get a slice of the pie.
B. The AZ vaccine costs far less than other vaccines, for now at least, so again the need to discredit it.
C. Other countries may have backed and funded the development of other vaccines not yet materialised, the taxpayers of which may question the funding if their vaccine is not needed or widely used.
Have you been drinking again?
|
It might not be how you read it, but when you follow through the “logic” that’s exactly what it says.
Capitalists (politicians) would prefer to spend more money on other vaccines than the cheaper AZ vaccine because of the “hundreds of millions” spent backing the development of other products.
For point A) you’re assuming there’s AstraZeneca product unused, discarded or not being produced as a result of these decisions. I highly doubt this is the case - manufacturing of all vaccines will be at maximum capacity for some time. We are already talking about an Autumn booster - that’ll presumably be higher priority than customers further down the AZ order books.
For point B) discredit it to who?
For point C) what you’ve not grasped, and nor did tin foil hat man, is that ending lockdowns and restrictions is worth tens of billions to global economies. The relative buttons spent in vaccine development in the US, EU and UK on products that might never see the light of day is neither here nor there by comparison. No taxpayer is likely to feel that strongly about unsuccessful developments or a short term price premium being paid. Relative to our test and trace system that didn’t work, or dodgy lateral flow tests that are no more reliable than a coin toss, it’s small beer.