4 ms·

Yeah, $20 a shot vs $3 a shot buys a lot of influence. Still, it’s good that someone stepped up the the plate, otherwise most people on earth would remain unva

by hyko 5y ago

Yeah, $20 a shot vs $3 a shot buys a lot of influence. Still, it’s good that someone stepped up the the plate, otherwise most people on earth would remain unvaccinated.

akie 5y ago
What would also help is if the UK and the US would export vaccine to other countries, like the rest of the world does. Sharing is caring? EDIT: https://www.statista.com/chart/24555/vaccine-doses-produced-and-exported/ https://www.statista.com/chart/24555/vaccine-doses-produced-...
- hyko 5y ago
  Well...not really. The UK manufacturing capacity is tiny from a global perspective. The EU tried to scapegoat the UK for their failure to run an efficient procurement, but that was just irrational politicking. The U.S. obviously has more manufacturing capacity, but like the UK it basically has no chance of dealing with the pandemic without mass vaccination, so exports are a political non starter. What was really required was a globally coordinated response to the design, test, manufacture, and distribution of COVID-19 vaccine candidates, through the WHO/CEPI with the backing of the security council members. Unfortunately with the major countries locked in various levels of sub-explosive warfare with each other (and our international institutions gravely weakened*) we've ended up with a scramble powered by commerce and nationalism. Edit: *through malice and incompetence
  - akie 5y ago
    > so exports are a political non-starter ...in the US and the UK. In the end it's also a reflection of what is important to a nation. Should the strong help the weak? Is it every man for themselves? Thank you for making my point. I think pointing to "international organizations" to do something, when you could have done something yourself, is a weak argument.
    - ghaff 5y ago
      Why on earth would the US export when it's supply-constrained itself? Of course, the US can and will export once it has sufficient supply. But countries exist in large part to look after the self-interest of their own population. It would rightly be a complete political non-starter for the US to start shipping vaccines elsewhere while it still needed more doses domestically.
      - akie 5y ago
        Don't you think Europe is supply-constrained? What about India/Russia/China? If these countries didn't export, Israel wouldn't have any vaccine, Australia wouldn't have any vaccine, Canada wouldn't have any vaccine, New Zealand wouldn't have any vaccine. And let's not even talk about the rest of the world. But yeah, it's inconvenient. I get it. Greed is good! Let them starve.
        hyko 5y ago
        Wouldn’t the greedy thing be to export all the vaccines you produce for maximum profit?
      - sudosysgen 5y ago
        Everyone is supply constrained. Actually, the US is probably the country that is the least supply constrained. Yet the EU and even India/China/Russia are exporting vaccines. This speaks a lot.
    - hyko 5y ago
      The strong should protect the weak; they still have to put their own oxygen mask on first though. Protecting your citizens is the first duty of government. There is a political failure here, but the domestic mass vaccination programs aren’t part of it.
    - JetSetWilly 5y ago
      > in the US and the UK. In the end it's also a reflection of what is important to a nation. Should the strong help the weak? Is it every man for themselves? Thank you for making my point. The UK has no ban on vaccine exports. It is more accurately the case that nobody has ordered vaccines from the UK except for the UK itself, because the UK had absolutely zero vaccine manufacturing facilities. And of course it is factually false in any case: https://www.dw.com/en/australia-receives-astrazeneca-vaccines-through-uk-report/a-57129511 https://www.dw.com/en/australia-receives-astrazeneca-vaccine... The EU (after encouraging other countries to invest in facilities in the EU) changed its mind and interdicted vaccines going to Australia. So they got some manufactured from the UK instead. But somehow it is the UK that is the bad guy!
- youngtaff 5y ago
  Looking at exported vaccine doses is a blunt measure The lipids used in Pfizer's come from UK, Moderna exported vaccines from EU are actually brewed in Switzerland and finished in Spain for export
- mnw21cam 5y ago
  The UK mostly doesn't export its vaccines, because it makes much more sense for them to just set up other factories manufacturing them in other countries. Which is what AZ has done.

by hyko 5y ago

Yeah, $20 a shot vs $3 a shot buys a lot of influence. Still, it’s good that someone stepped up the the plate, otherwise most people on earth would remain unvaccinated.

akie 5y ago

What would also help is if the UK and the US would export vaccine to other countries, like the rest of the world does. Sharing is caring? EDIT: https://www.statista.com/chart/24555/vaccine-doses-produced-and-exported/ https://www.statista.com/chart/24555/vaccine-doses-produced-...

hyko 5y ago
Well...not really. The UK manufacturing capacity is tiny from a global perspective. The EU tried to scapegoat the UK for their failure to run an efficient procurement, but that was just irrational politicking. The U.S. obviously has more manufacturing capacity, but like the UK it basically has no chance of dealing with the pandemic without mass vaccination, so exports are a political non starter. What was really required was a globally coordinated response to the design, test, manufacture, and distribution of COVID-19 vaccine candidates, through the WHO/CEPI with the backing of the security council members. Unfortunately with the major countries locked in various levels of sub-explosive warfare with each other (and our international institutions gravely weakened*) we've ended up with a scramble powered by commerce and nationalism. Edit: *through malice and incompetence
- akie 5y ago
  > so exports are a political non-starter ...in the US and the UK. In the end it's also a reflection of what is important to a nation. Should the strong help the weak? Is it every man for themselves? Thank you for making my point. I think pointing to "international organizations" to do something, when you could have done something yourself, is a weak argument.
  - ghaff 5y ago
    Why on earth would the US export when it's supply-constrained itself? Of course, the US can and will export once it has sufficient supply. But countries exist in large part to look after the self-interest of their own population. It would rightly be a complete political non-starter for the US to start shipping vaccines elsewhere while it still needed more doses domestically.
    - akie 5y ago
      Don't you think Europe is supply-constrained? What about India/Russia/China? If these countries didn't export, Israel wouldn't have any vaccine, Australia wouldn't have any vaccine, Canada wouldn't have any vaccine, New Zealand wouldn't have any vaccine. And let's not even talk about the rest of the world. But yeah, it's inconvenient. I get it. Greed is good! Let them starve.
      - hyko 5y ago
        Wouldn’t the greedy thing be to export all the vaccines you produce for maximum profit?
    - sudosysgen 5y ago
      Everyone is supply constrained. Actually, the US is probably the country that is the least supply constrained. Yet the EU and even India/China/Russia are exporting vaccines. This speaks a lot.
  - hyko 5y ago
    The strong should protect the weak; they still have to put their own oxygen mask on first though. Protecting your citizens is the first duty of government. There is a political failure here, but the domestic mass vaccination programs aren’t part of it.
  - JetSetWilly 5y ago
    > in the US and the UK. In the end it's also a reflection of what is important to a nation. Should the strong help the weak? Is it every man for themselves? Thank you for making my point. The UK has no ban on vaccine exports. It is more accurately the case that nobody has ordered vaccines from the UK except for the UK itself, because the UK had absolutely zero vaccine manufacturing facilities. And of course it is factually false in any case: https://www.dw.com/en/australia-receives-astrazeneca-vaccines-through-uk-report/a-57129511 https://www.dw.com/en/australia-receives-astrazeneca-vaccine... The EU (after encouraging other countries to invest in facilities in the EU) changed its mind and interdicted vaccines going to Australia. So they got some manufactured from the UK instead. But somehow it is the UK that is the bad guy!
youngtaff 5y ago
Looking at exported vaccine doses is a blunt measure The lipids used in Pfizer's come from UK, Moderna exported vaccines from EU are actually brewed in Switzerland and finished in Spain for export
mnw21cam 5y ago
The UK mostly doesn't export its vaccines, because it makes much more sense for them to just set up other factories manufacturing them in other countries. Which is what AZ has done.