5 ms·
It Would Cost $50B to Vaccinate the World, OECD Says
- jbverschoor 5y agoAnd $8B to cure world hunger
- tata71 5y agoUp from $6B just weeks ago!(?)
- jbverschoor 5y agoOh I thought I heard 8. Could be eur/usd. But you’re probably right
- Ekaros 5y agoFor how long period? That sounds very cheap. Like bit over dollar per person... Fraction a cent a day...
- saeranv 5y agoIt's not 8B divided by the total world population, it's 8B divided by fraction of world population that is hungry. I don't know what that fraction is, but it doesn't work out to $1 per person.
- ouid 5y agoI assume that you are makin ga joke or a reference to something becuase this number is absurd. That's a bag of chips per person.
- Engineering-MD 5y agoI assume it refers to investment needed to create a system which would make hunger hit areas able to feed themselves, which would cure hunger world wide over the long term.
- 1cvmask 5y ago
- justtologin 5y agoI think the point of the headline is to show how shockingly low the cost would be compared to the economic cost of covid. At the same time, it's a bit disingenuous. What does "vaccinate the world" mean now? Two shots, three, ongoing six-monthly boosters? Even that ignores the fact that the vaccine doesn't work that well on new variants. It would be nice if it was that simple to just spend a "trivial" amount of money and end this, but I don't see anything actionable here Thinking more about this, it's a bit the same as the thing with Elon Musk and the world food program, in that proponents have put a price tag on something that's not too high, but when you dig into it, that something doesn't really get you as far as it's proponents make it out. It would be great to see Elon or someone of similar means say they will put up the $50 Bn if they are given a sound proposal of how it would end covid restrictions
- Ekaros 5y agoAnd 80%+ rates are not enough to stop fascist totalitarian policies... And those rates are at 2 doses. Who knows to how many we end up before we simply give up.
- multjoy 5y agoIf you have global vaccination, you reduce the opportunity for new strains; we're getting variants like omicrom because we have large populations of vaccinated and unvaccinated mixing. If you wanted to create a situation in which new strains were inevitable, you couldn't plan it better.
- cruelty2 5y ago
- dang 5y agoWould you please stop posting ideological/political battle comments to HN? It's not what this site is for, and it destroys what it is for. Moreover, when an account is using HN primarily for that, that's the line at which we ban it (see https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comment&storyText=false&prefix=false&page=0&query=primarily%20test%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme... for past explanations). Your account seems to be inching close to that line, if it isn't over it. That's definitely not the intended use of the site. If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.
- midjji 5y agoAh the blissful ignorance of optimists assuming people would voluntarily do the obviously right thing...
- Mountain_Skies 5y agoYes, it's shameful that deer, minks, and other mammals that spread the virus refuse to line up for their shots.
- ipspam 5y agoObviously right thing? Perhaps that hubris should be saved until the results are in..... It takes very very little government intervention to indirectly kill 1 out of 200 people. And when you move to life years lost, the government has to kill less than 1 in some absurdly high number like a 1000.
- cyanydeez 5y agoeven worse, most readers would think 50 billion is expensive. for the world.
- pangolinplayer 5y agoand the pharma laughs all the way to the bank.
- pangolinplayer 5y agoand big pharma laughs all the way to the bank.
- tinus_hn 5y agoSo how has this been calculated, given that it is not known how many ‘boosters’ are going to be needed?