Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
“The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has asked state public health officials to prepare to distribute a potential coronavirus vaccine to high-risk groups as soon as late October, documents published by the agency showed on Wednesday.” Reuters
“The Trump administration said Tuesday that it will not work with an international cooperative effort to develop and distribute a COVID-19 vaccine because it does not want to be constrained by multilateral groups like the World Health Organization.” AP News
The right is optimistic about US efforts to develop a vaccine and supports efforts to expedite its production.
“The US may not be co-operating with the WHO program but its ‘Operation Warp Speed’ could yet turn into the 21st-century equivalent of the Manhattan Project that developed nuclear power during World War Two. Putin’s Sputnik vaccine may involve some childish breast-beating, but its name is also a reminder that one of the great scientific achievements of the 20th century — the exploration of space — was also driven by great power rivalry…
“Competition between nations has, historically, often driven innovation. That was certainly true of the Cold War space race. Or the scientific breakthroughs — from radar to rockets — of World War Two. Innovation doesn’t usually happen by itself. It takes money, resources, goals, organization, and pressure. When national prestige is at stake all of those are a lot more likely to be forthcoming. And right now, we need some rapid innovation.”
Matthew Lynn, Spectator USA
“Two leading vaccine candidates being rolled out for emergency use, one developed by Moscow’s Gamaleya Institute and the other by Tianjin-based CanSino Biologics, have been criticized for being potentially ineffective for large swaths of the population… There are also potential side effects… Neither the CanSino nor the Gamaleya effort made it through large-scale trials, which are often multi-year affairs involving thousands of participants, before rollout commenced. Indeed, China has already begun negotiations for use of its vaccine in partner countries before even efficacy at home has been established…
“Whoever arrives at a working vaccine first stands to control the momentum of the U.S.-China-Russia great power competition. A foreign power in control of such a resource would enjoy substantial international goodwill… No wonder Moscow and Beijing are ready to cut corners… China, for its part, has already proven to be an unreliable partner during the pandemic, selling faulty masks and tests that don’t work. An overhyped dud vaccine would do its international image no favors.”
John Jiang, American Spectator
The Secretary of Health and Human Services and the chief scientific advisor to Operation Warp Speed write, “The strategy we devised for [Operation Warp Speed] will allow us to accomplish [our goals] while following all the same procedures for safety and efficacy, applied by the same apolitical FDA experts, that Americans expect with all vaccines…
“Candidate vaccines needed robust scientific data supporting them. They needed the potential to enter large-scale Phase 3 trials for efficacy by the summer or fall of 2020. They had to be based on vaccine technologies that permit rapid and effective manufacturing. Finally, they had to use one of four vaccine-platform technologies we believed most likely to yield a safe and effective vaccine against COVID-19…
“By aiming to select eight candidates for support, two from each platform, we have built a portfolio that will maximize our chances at success… Each of the candidates selected has received support for some combination of research and development, clinical trials, and industrial manufacturing. These financial investments, thus far totaling more than $10 billion, combined with significant technical and logistical support, allow each company to undertake several steps of the vaccine development process in parallel, mitigating its financial risk without compromising the safety and efficacy of its vaccine.”
Alex M. Azar II and Moncef Slaoui, USA Today
“Preparedness can only take you so far, if by preparedness you mean action agendas and stockpiles of medicines and medical equipment. The pandemic has been a reminder that an indispensable core element of any nation’s ability to respond to crises is its technological prowess and wealth. Just the other day, the FDA OKed a simple and accurate coronavirus test that could cost just $5. Before that was the development of the anti-viral drug Remdesivir. And we hope that there will be a vaccine sooner rather than later. As it is, the development process has been greatly accelerated compared to previous efforts. Where would we be if medical and pharmaceutical technology were still at the levels of decades ago?”
James Pethokoukis, American Enterprise Institute
The left is critical of the decision not to work with the WHO and skeptical of expediting vaccine approval.
The left is critical of the decision not to work with the WHO and skeptical of expediting vaccine approval.
“Since the beginning of the pandemic, the president has accused the WHO of taking a deferential approach to China. But such a charge may be a simple projection, as he also thanked President Xi Jinping in January for keeping the virus ‘under control.’… Jeremy Konyndyk, a policy fellow at the Center for Global Development, called Trump’s treatment of the WHO a clear grasp ‘for anything it can to distract from its own poor performance. If they can blame this on WHO, or if they can blame this on a lab accident in China, that somehow alleviates them of their responsibility.’”
Matt Stieb, New York Magazine
“Nothing in the Covax project would prevent the United States from separate contracts to acquire vaccines directly. But by joining the global project, the United States would have a backstop, in case vaccines stumble in development, and it would help a huge swath of the world’s population get an equitable shot at fighting the pandemic. Once upon a time, the United States would gladly embrace such a program as an expression of leadership and lofty ideals… Mr. Trump’s 'America First' is a prescription for retreat from the world, an approach that leaves the United States more isolated and vulnerable.”
Editorial Board, Washington Post
“Medical experts worry that the move will leave struggling countries without access if the U.S. develops a vaccine first and refuses to share it with other countries or, less likely, that the U.S. could be left without a viable vaccine if all of the clinical trials in the country ultimately fail. Even if the U.S. is able to develop and distribute a mostly-effective vaccine to its own residents, many Americans could still be left vulnerable to imported infections if other countries do not have access… The decision suggests that the administration is betting that the United States will be the first to develop an approved vaccine, which experts said was a risky gamble.”
Igor Derysh, Salon
“The CDC, the FDA and other federal scientific institutions must share all the data they are using to make decisions. Cherry-picking data points to justify a desired outcome will only seed doubt, as the FDA commissioner discovered when he exalted the use of convalescent plasma based on a small data subset…
“Those in favor of expediting approval of therapeutics and vaccines have argued that pandemics require a different standard, with a more streamlined process and lower bar for approval than during normal times. What is that process, and what are those standards? The public has a right to know this now. Otherwise, it will rightly suspect that goal posts have been moved to justify politically motivated shortcuts.”
Leana S. Wen, Washington Post
“President Gerald Ford’s effort to vaccinate all Americans against swine flu ended in disaster in 1976 after 450 vaccinated individuals were paralyzed with Guillain–Barré syndrome. Tellingly, like Trump, Ford was running to stay in the White House that year… In 1997, President Bill Clinton, invoking President John F. Kennedy’s 1961 pledge to land an American on the moon by the end of the decade, set a noble and ambitious national goal: to develop a safe and effective vaccine against AIDS within 10 years… We know how that turned out…
“Lesson one: Humility is in order for those who predict a vaccine is just around the corner. Lesson two: We should hedge our big bet on vaccines, giving equal priority and funding to treatment research. The current research agenda is anything but balanced. Consider that the U.S. government, as listed by the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority, has so far invested $10.7 billion alone on manufacturing support for vaccines vs. about $1 billion on treatment.”
Victor F. Zonana, Washington Post
“A too-early EUA for a vaccine could cause a ‘nightmare scenario,’ for a few reasons. One, the vaccine may not be safe. Two, if it is not safe, people will lose faith in vaccines. Three, if a vaccine doesn't offer complete protection, people will have a false sense of security and increase their risk. Four, if a substandard vaccine gets an EUA, a better vaccine may never get approval, because people would be reluctant to enroll in trials and risk getting a placebo instead of a vaccine.”
Jen Christensen, CNN
A libertarian's take
“There is a strong case that the FDA should take politics into account more, not less. The FDA has been too risk-averse in the very recent past, for instance in its reluctance to approve additional Covid-19 testing. Economists have generally concluded that the FDA is too risk-averse in the long term as well, considering all relevant trade-offs. What kind of fix might there be for those problems, if not a ‘political’ one? Of course the initial risk-aversion was itself the result of a political calculation, namely the desire to avoid blame from the public and from Congress…
“An interdisciplinary group of experts has promoted the idea of so-called human challenge trials to get vaccines tested more quickly and accelerate the fight against Covid-19. The FDA did not endorse this idea, despite its value, partly (and certainly) for political reasons. In sum: The American people will not buy the claim that the current FDA is above politics. Nor should they.”
Tyler Cowen, Bloomberg
