Richard Epstein says @MadhaviSunder & I are “panglossian” in calling for waiving TRIPS obligations as a piece of vaccine access puzzle. Doing so he provides great summary of baseless arguments against.
Steeped in misinformation and neocolonialism.
Retro to HIV circa 2000...🧵
1: Africans, Asians, LatAmers cant vaccinate:
RE:“Local players—such as doctors, health care officials, pharmacists, transportation officials, & many more—all must be able to efficiently utilize these US technologies for any program to work. Do they have the capacity to do that?"
…Remarkable. If exact same hadn't been said on HIV in Africa I would be surprised. Yes, despite health systems weaknesses low&mid-income country healthworkers can provide vaccines. Yes cold-chain is tricky. Yes it can be, has been, will be done
The new "Africans cant tell time"
2: Vax inequity problem is LMIC govts fault:
“it is first necessary to understand how the crisis in developing countries arose... much of that shortfall is due to the slow and archaic government systems of distribution, which are often broken (if not corrupt) at every level”
…less nice but not far from what many are saying.
And it's bunk. There is simply a massive lack of vaccines to distribute. Less than 1% of doses have been DELIVERED to LICs. 16% to lower-middle income.
👇
…This is VERY close to the same line as Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla who claims the problem is countries not ordering. In fact, Pfizer has completely failed to deliver even the basic doses they promised and put LMICs at the back of procurement line every time bloomberg.com/news/articles/…
3.Sharing wasn't in Moderna's contract!
“...Moderna vaccine, even though the US funded more than 99% of the total cost should not be subject to a collateral attack by letting the government renege on its contract—or unduly lean on the company—to ensure a vaccine supply overseas”
…actually multiple laws subject Moderna to public obligations & give US govt power. That the Trump administration didn’t build those into Moderna contract was a huge error but it does negate the legal & political options.
Read @akapczynski@JRavinthiran1 lpeproject.org/blog/how-to-va…
4. Just pay a ton more to Pfizer, Moderna, J&J!
RE: “Putting the cost on the government allows it to maintain the incentives of the patent system while pursuing its international objectives.”
…there are so many reasons why this is a bad move. a) we have a supply crisis, these Co.s have neither the capacity nor the will to serve LMIC markets. They have shown it over and over in the last 6 months.
Where are the COVAX doses???
…meanwhile, monopoly + lack of supply is massively distorting vaccine effort. Countries agreeing to high prices & outrageous conditions b/c they have no viable options. Soon companies will move to raise prices. We need a solution that actually works for low&mid-income countries.
…Instead of paying more $ into system that's not working, expand producers & end monopolies, at minimum for LMICs. If wealthy countries like the US [which can literally print money for vax] want to meet demands that’s a problem but not costing lives. In LMIC its deadly.
5. Waiving TRIPS will destroy innovation!
RE: “The enormous development costs cannot be levied against the few individuals who first take the vaccine, but instead must be spread across the entire population of potential users to allow firms to recover their initial investment.
…except, the vast majority of the costs of development have ALREADY been paid several times over by a combination of taxpayer funded research and trials & advanced commitments. Meaning companies had approximately no risk.
I guess the argument is people in LMICs should be denied vaxs for some future innovation ideal?
… but see also
6.South-produced vaccines will be re-imported!
RE: Vax “delivered to an undeveloped country for sale at a low price could be illegally reshipped to a richer country where they could undercut the local prices, which could in turn reduce the ability of the patent holder to recover
Didnt see this one coming. What? Vaccines are being provided FOR FREE with the goal of universal coverage in high-income countries.
If ever I’ve seen a distraction-point with an echo right back to HIV in 2000 this is it!
Governments can do multiple things at once on global #COVIDVaccine access. At risk of over-political-scienceing: Need to disntinguish 2 agenda-setting arguments re WTO waiver as "distraction"
-Govts can't do waiver and X (not a real argument)
-Govts might use to distract (fair)
We know (takes Baum&Jones off shelf) govts have limited political attention:
Aside: FAR too little focus on political strategy for vaccine equity. I see this as core prob of COVAX. Political agenda occupied by sharing doses (implausible) instead of knowledge to produce.
But PLENTY of political attention to both do TRIPS waiver and do tech transfer + funding. WTO negotiations will be done by trade ministers/reps with significant capacity. Issues are straightforward. I can say talking to USG, WH+State+HHS have plenty capacity to walk + chew gum.
Economists please meet the idea of multiple causality. Insufficient supply of vaccines IS driven by WTO rules & IP monopolies. It's not the ONLY cause. We also need tech transfer & funding & more @ATabarrok gets so many things here wrong…
a quick list🧵 marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolu…
“Licenses are widely available” They are not. Most of the world has been dependent on ONE exclusive license to ONE manufacturer, Serum Institute. Many other high-quality firms could be making vaxs but monopoly holders said no. Because of monopoly they can. 2/11
“J&J’s vaccine has been licensed for production in… South Africa.” Nope.
One company has a “fill and finish” contract with J&N in SA. They have been been given the right or the tech to make the full vax or distribute on their own. Sub-contractors are not what’s needed here 3/11
The #TRIPSWaiver: lots of misunderstanding & mis-information on WTO & law.
A thread on why it's:
-not going to harm innovation
-not radical
- harmful to pretend it is
-not going to touch US pharma patents
-(as we all said) just 1 piece of #CovidVaccine access puzzle
🧵1/14
1)Those arguing TRIPS waiver will undermine the innovation that got us #COVIDVaccines are asking us to believe start-ups (Moderna, BioNTech) and universities (Oxford, UPenn) are going to stop taking public money to develop & trial breakthrough vaccines (!?) or 2/12
or that major pharma companies are going to refuse to commercialize technologies with huge potential rewards ($billions from massive orders) that have largely been de-risked by public + philanthropic efforts if they are only promised monopolies in US, EU and other HICs… 3/14
How much longer 'til we remove barriers to LMIC vax produc? Argument against: might slow down HIC production? Given inequity @POTUS has to see now the urgency.
Quick 🧵 what I and others have written. If we'd seen action, might be factories running today.
No more delays.../1
July 2020: @CyrilRamaphosa & heads of state + world leaders called for open sharing of vaccine science for global production. We've seen that companies like @moderna_tx@BioNTech_Group@pfizer have set up whole new factories in 3-6 months.
Imagine if we'd started last year... /2
.@JoeBiden must act on vaccine equity. @MadhaviSunder & I argue today @BLaw voluntary measures & donations won't work. USG needs to use leverage of public funding and IP to compel sharing of technology. WTO agreement was premised on tech transfer... news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/bi…
The US is now vaccinating everyone under 16 while older people & frontline health workers in much of the world have no access.
This is bad public health.
Deeply unjust.
And economically damaging @SecYellen said /2 washingtonpost.com/us-policy/2021…
$4 billion to #COVAX is important, but Covax is struggling to reach even an insufficient goal of 20% vaccinations in low- and middle-income countries. Donating $ and surplus vaccines will NOT achieve vaccine equity or halt the pandemic /3
....@USATODAY says it's false because "the vaccine was funded by a combination of government spending, private donations and research grants" and that "$2.5 billion was given for the development of the company's vaccine and to purchase doses" not for research. Nope 🙅.../2
...First, there's the matter of very clear public funding on the front end. 1) NIH scientists directly worked on this (yay them!) along with handing out grants to others to work on this 2) BARDA gave $955m.
✔️Both are taxpayer funding for research.../3