There’s a lot of muddled thinking on what the problem with export bans is. So... in the form of a Q&A, a quick overview (thread)
1) Is it the rule of law?
Two components to this, arguably. Is there a problem because it interferes with private contracts? Not really. Most regulatory power does. Take Brexit: it interferes with thousands of contracts. Or the UK ban on parallel exports of some medicines. What about international law?
As to international law most treaties have exceptions that would cover such measures. So on to 2) Is the problem that nobody will invest in the EU In the future?
Also not really. Industry has a way around export bans: it can licence production elsewhere. That’s a policy we’ve actually praised with regard to AstraZeneca. It’s industry’s solution for the UK approach, but also for export bans.
3) So what is the problem? The problem is that export bans and closing markets will lead to others taking the same measure. And not just for the vaccine, but for raw materials, components such as glass vials etc.
The risk we run is a breakdown of supply chains. So before you take such a measure you‘d better be sure for every bit of vital stuff where it comes from and whether and how you still get it.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Holger Hestermeyer

Holger Hestermeyer Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @hhesterm

22 Mar
A note on timing of contracts: The first sentence here is wrong. So those who tweeted at me that the EU signed first so it wins or that the UK signed first so it wins (yup, got both of those): both wrong. Interested why?
Suppose A signs a contract with B. Two days later it signed a contract with C. Both contracts are for delivering 100 widges. Result? A has to deliver 100 widges to B AND to C. It is obliged to deliver both according to the terms of the agreement.
Problems only arise if A cannot deliver on both contracts. What then? Well, A still owes the 100 widges to both parties. If there’s no term in the contract giving preference to one or the other or modifying the obligation - A will have to break at least one contract.
Read 4 tweets
22 Mar
Curious fact of contract law: I can sell the same Picasso painting to 15 people. I am contractually obligated to deliver the Picasso to all of them. Each one has the same claim, unless that specific contract stipulates otherwise.
Also true if I don't have a Picasso painting.
And just for @SpinningHugo : if I conclude 15 identical contracts for producing 100 widgets, but actually only can produce 100 on times, the same problem arises: all 15 have a claim against me. Priority is only valid if in the contract.
Now I don’t know what was in these contracts. Let y’all battle it out. But it’s not won on the grand principles of contract law. It’s won on the specifics of the contract.
Read 4 tweets
16 Mar
Some information on the analysis undertaken by the PEI pei.de/SharedDocs/Dow…
Includes such great terms as pharmacoviligance risk assessment and observed v expected analysis, even though it's in German. And it explains the timing of the decision of the PEI.
(Just in case: PEI= Paul Ehrlich Institut, the German federal institute for vaccines, sort of the Robert Koch Institut for vaccines)
Read 4 tweets
16 Mar
A quick hypo: assume a glass vial manufacturer has a production issue and a charge of 10.000 of its vials is contaminated. The vial is used for vaccines. The contamination leads to an increased frequency of heart attacks. How does the regulator find out?
Another hypo: assume one of the chemicals used in producing a vaccine is not up to the normal standard of the company. Despite using the adequate standard of diligence they do not detect it, because it wasn't detectable. How does the regulator find out?
The answer is: the regulator gets tons and tons of data on problems. From "I felt like I had to drink alcohol after taking the drug, which is why I had to drive drunk" (well, dubious) to "I could not sleep" to "X died, no idea why".
Read 6 tweets
15 Mar
An object lesson in how doing a bit of research, but not really research ends up misinforming rather than informing people. A thread
The information in the above thread has all the hallmarks of what one might think of as "good information". It has numbers (we love numbers). A source. Comparisons.
And yet it actually misinforms rather than informs. The lesson for students: you need context to interpret data.
The thread refers to data from adverse reaction reports. The EMA collects these in a website. But what the thread does not explain is what these reports mean. The EMA actually puts a disclaimer on its website. Here it is.
Read 7 tweets
12 Mar
The US has 10s of millions of doses of AZ vaccine in storage. It has not admitted the vaccine, but does not allow AZ to export. Now I do not engage in this debate, but I am interested in the meta-debate, the debate about the debate (short thread) nytimes.com/2021/03/11/us/…
I have not seen this NY Times story from yesterday in my timeline. I think it is safe to say that it has not caused anything near the outrage that was caused by Germany being slow administering AZ and having 1 million doses on storage. /2
So why the difference? I know some people will say “but the US was not talking AZ or the UK down”. Which only leads to more curiosity, because it means that we’ve also missed stories like this one. /3 theguardian.com/society/2020/o…
Read 7 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!