4 ms·
To be fair I'm pretty sure discussion about pricing never were the bottleneck, they happened in parallel to the safety/efficacy approval, so Europe saved 1.2B E
by Voloskaya 6y ago
To be fair I'm pretty sure discussion about pricing never were the bottleneck, they happened in parallel to the safety/efficacy approval, so Europe saved 1.2B Euros doing this, at no other cost.
- tim333 6y agoWell $5 vs $2 isn't really what happened. It was more in the UK: >Under Bingham’s direction, the taskforce helped the Government to secure agreements to have access to six different vaccines across four different formats, amounting to 357 million doses – without being certain any of them would work. Spending £1 billion up front, it could not have been a bigger gamble. Whereas the EU didn't do that. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/work/kate-bingham-exclusive-interview-eu-leaders-undermining-vaccine/ https://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/work/kate-bingham-exclusiv...
- Voloskaya 6y agoWhat did the EU "not do"? The EU did pretty much exactly the same thing, securing access to 2.3B doses from 6 different providers and investing 2.7B$ for vaccine development (on top of the price tag of the vaccines themselves). I don't think I understand what you are trying to say.
- tim333 6y agoNot sure. To be honest I'm not that up on the details.