3 ms·

We could have a futures market for doses. That way the government doesn’t have to pick winners in the drug development arena, something it historically isn’t ve

by peytn 6y ago

We could have a futures market for doses. That way the government doesn’t have to pick winners in the drug development arena, something it historically isn’t very good at.

maxerickson 6y ago
We could have ordered 300 million courses each of the top 5 or 10 vaccine candidates for, in essence, peanuts. $2 billion for Oxford. $3 billion for J&J. $20 billion for Novavax. $24 billion for Pfizer (at worst price). $48 billion for Moderna (again, worst price). You end up with a billion vaccines you don't need, you give them away. This is likely an over-investment if you consider the US in isolation (for instance, all 5 vaccines work well to reduce symptomatic and serious infections).
- dukeyukey 6y ago
  That's exactly what the UK did, they ordered over 400 million doses of various vaccines before major trials had even begun, and intends on giving spare supply away, starting with Ireland. Source: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55274833 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55274833 https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/01/31/britain-give-ireland-priority-sharing-covid-vaccines/ https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/01/31/britain-give...
- peytn 6y ago
  I’m not sure rapid procurement is as simple as government money in, doses out. Incentives must align.
- jbullock35 6y ago
  > We could have ordered 300 million courses each of the top 5 or 10 vaccine candidates for, in essence, peanuts. It sounds as though you're talking about the advance purchases that the U.S. made as part of its "Operation Warp Speed" -- except that you (reasonably) would have liked those purchases to be even larger than they were. See especially the table in https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2020-10-29/inside-operation-warp-speed-s-18-billion-sprint-for-a-vaccine https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2020-10-29/inside-op...
  - maxerickson 6y ago
    Yeah, I'm aware of the of the advance purchases. And I wouldn't say I'm arguing for them to be "even larger", as I'm saying that 5x larger would be a good starting point. For the less expensive vaccines it doesn't make any sense at all that they ordered 100 million doses instead of 300 million. For the mRNA vaccines I have a lot of questions about how hard they tried to identify potential bottlenecks in say, July (but I don't think there is much information available to decide in either direction.).
    - peytn 6y ago
      Why would ordering more doses help?
      - maxerickson 6y ago
        Whatever the word for it, the government should have provided and deployed the resources to vastly scale up manufacturing of each reasonable candidate (so say, when phase III trials began). I link a working paper in another comment where some economists estimate that we left an awful lot on the table. The US less than the globe, but given the shared benefits, this would be a great issue for a wealthy country to take a leadership role on.

by peytn 6y ago

We could have a futures market for doses. That way the government doesn’t have to pick winners in the drug development arena, something it historically isn’t very good at.

maxerickson 6y ago

We could have ordered 300 million courses each of the top 5 or 10 vaccine candidates for, in essence, peanuts. $2 billion for Oxford. $3 billion for J&J. $20 billion for Novavax. $24 billion for Pfizer (at worst price). $48 billion for Moderna (again, worst price). You end up with a billion vaccines you don't need, you give them away. This is likely an over-investment if you consider the US in isolation (for instance, all 5 vaccines work well to reduce symptomatic and serious infections).

dukeyukey 6y ago
That's exactly what the UK did, they ordered over 400 million doses of various vaccines before major trials had even begun, and intends on giving spare supply away, starting with Ireland. Source: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55274833 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55274833 https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/01/31/britain-give-ireland-priority-sharing-covid-vaccines/ https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/01/31/britain-give...
peytn 6y ago
I’m not sure rapid procurement is as simple as government money in, doses out. Incentives must align.
jbullock35 6y ago
> We could have ordered 300 million courses each of the top 5 or 10 vaccine candidates for, in essence, peanuts. It sounds as though you're talking about the advance purchases that the U.S. made as part of its "Operation Warp Speed" -- except that you (reasonably) would have liked those purchases to be even larger than they were. See especially the table in https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2020-10-29/inside-operation-warp-speed-s-18-billion-sprint-for-a-vaccine https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2020-10-29/inside-op...
- maxerickson 6y ago
  Yeah, I'm aware of the of the advance purchases. And I wouldn't say I'm arguing for them to be "even larger", as I'm saying that 5x larger would be a good starting point. For the less expensive vaccines it doesn't make any sense at all that they ordered 100 million doses instead of 300 million. For the mRNA vaccines I have a lot of questions about how hard they tried to identify potential bottlenecks in say, July (but I don't think there is much information available to decide in either direction.).
  - peytn 6y ago
    Why would ordering more doses help?
    - maxerickson 6y ago
      Whatever the word for it, the government should have provided and deployed the resources to vastly scale up manufacturing of each reasonable candidate (so say, when phase III trials began). I link a working paper in another comment where some economists estimate that we left an awful lot on the table. The US less than the globe, but given the shared benefits, this would be a great issue for a wealthy country to take a leadership role on.