mazzucato14_XinhuaZhang Yuwei via Getty Images_coronavirusvaccinelab

Jak vyvinout vakcínu proti COVID-19 pro všechny

Apr 27, 2020 Mariana Mazzucato , Els Torreele

LONDÝN – V prvních týdnech roku 2020 začalo lidem docházet, že COVID-19 by se mohl stát dlouho obávanou, leč očekávanou „nemocí X“ – globální pandemií způsobenou neznámým virem. O tři měsíce později je většina světové populace zavřená doma a je zjevné, že budeme jen tak zdraví, jak budou zdraví lidé kolem nás – na lokální, národní i mezinárodní úrovni.

Klíčem k ochraně společnosti před nemocí COVID-19 budou silné zdravotnické systémy, dostatečné testovací kapacity a efektivní a všeobecně dostupná vakcína. Zajištění, aby nikdo nezůstal opomenutý, však bude vyžadovat nejen bezprecedentní společné investice, ale i diametrálně odlišný přístup.

Vědci na univerzitách a ve firmách z celého světa se překotně snaží vyvinout vakcínu. A pokrok je povzbudivý: v současnosti se aktivně zkoumá nebo prochází předklinickým vývojem 73 kandidátů na vakcínu, přičemž pět dalších už vstoupilo do fáze klinických zkoušek.

To continue reading, register now.

As a registered user, you can enjoy more PS content every month – for free.

Subscribe now for unlimited access to everything PS has to offer.

Already have an account? Log in

Subscribe to Project Syndicate

Enjoy unlimited access to the ideas and opinions of the world's leading thinkers, including weekly long reads, book reviews, topical collections, and interviews; The Year Ahead annual print magazine; the complete PS archive; and more. All for less than $9 a month.

Subscribe Now

Mariana Mazzucato

Writing for PS since 2015
39 Commentaries

Mariana Mazzucato, Professor in the Economics of Innovation and Public Value at University College London, is Founding Director of the UCL Institute for Innovation and Public Purpose and Chair of the World Health Organization’s Council on the Economics of Health For All . She is the author of The Value of Everything: Making and Taking in the Global Economy (Penguin Books, 2019), The Entrepreneurial State: Debunking Public vs. Private Sector Myths (Penguin Books, 2018), and, most recently, Mission Economy: A Moonshot Guide to Changing Capitalism (Penguin Books, 2022).

Els Torreele

Writing for PS since 2020
2 Commentaries

Els Torreele is a visiting policy fellow at the UCL Institute for Innovation and Public Purpose.

new comment has been posted. new comments have been posted.

0 Comments on this paragraph, 7 Comments on this article

Effie Zafiropoulou Nov 17, 2020

Well we are not seeing a global alliance are we?It was called for in April and we are still at the 'MUST'stage.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Elizabeth Pula May 15, 2020

https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/coronavirus-covid-19-update-fda-informs-public-about-possible-accuracy-concerns-abbott-id-now-point
Fat chance. Here"s Abbott- Alere- testing devices for COV( also note that the name and branding of the test has changed at least twice in less than 2 years.
Great going guys. What a brand. What a virus. What a way to make money, honey!)
https://www.reuters.com/article/legal-us-alere-m-a/abbott-wins-u-s-antitrust-approval-to-buy-alere-with-conditions-idUSKCN1C32VH

Here's Cepheid:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cepheid_Inc

And a little more about pricing and how to make money. Another scheme for the schemers.

"There has been controversy around Cepheid's test-cartridge pricing. Cepheid announced that they would charge US$19.80 per COVID-19 test in developing countries[4][29] (prices are higher in middle-income countries; for instance, GeneXpert TB tests cost $55-$82 per cartridge in Indonesia[29]). Doctors without borders stated that that price was not affordable in countries where people live on less than two dollars a day.[4][29] They estimated[5] that the cost to Cepheid of providing the test is as low as $3, and called the offered price profiteering, asking that Cepheid make a more moderate profit by selling the tests for US$5 each.[29][4][6]"

Then for Abbott- the results are about as valid as throwing a coin toss! I happened to get one of the tests on this Wednesday. I called the lab today at the Hospital. Lab didn't even want to give any information as to what test they use. As if a person who has symptoms, has been in the emergency room etc. just might want to know just how valid the test results are???
I'd say this whole event is a money making scheme for the top dogs of the schemers.
I just wonder what is getting routed to FB and MS non-profits etal. A bunch going right up the vertical privatized streams! Now the sourcing is no longer just the hard assets, like land, property and money, or what passes for money. Now, its getting into the really itsy bitsy bits of RNA, DNA and chromosomes of the global citizens.

When the VIRUSES are getting patented, and NOT just the vaccines, that says it all!

https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/coronavirus-covid-19-update-fda-informs-public-about-possible-accuracy-concerns-abbott-id-now-point

With the poor validity of the test results, it is essentially worthless. Thanks Emergency Room Care Staff for really wanting to provide any real care, totally careless.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Elizabeth Pula May 7, 2020

Glad you mentioned some of the other side of the story. Presently, with the patent:
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PTXT&s1=10,130,701&OS=10,130,701&RS=10,130,701

that Pirbright Institute already has, which includes on line 19 of that Patent claim for the vaccine for any virus with any of the RNA sequencing in the patent claims- one owner of the vaccine could very likely continue, and note, I am writing, continue to rule the globe.

Although the patent is for an avian corona virus, these viral agents do not only necessarily cause disease limited to only fowl. As noted, on line 19 of the patent claim, any developed vaccine is also to include vaccine FOR HUMAN DISEASE.

Do remember that the Gates Foundation not only is the prime funder for the lab, but FB family foundation's is prime funder for the lab that is developing testing equipment to test any human that may be required to be tested globally for a
specific viral disease. It remains to be seen just what Corona Virus Number/s will be assigned as all of the secondary details of proprietary licensing rights get settled amongst any original claimants according to any agreements affecting private licensing rights.

Does any one questioned filing a patent claim for any VIRUS as an INVENTION?

In fact HAS any one questioned, just what is any body doing INVENTING any VIRUS?

Now, it is very significant to remember this: "The great plasticity of rapidly-evolving RNA-viruses in response to human intervention, which extends beyond the poultry industry, is demonstrated, claiming further attention due to their relevance for animal and especially human health."
https://veterinaryresearch.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13567-019-0713-4

Animals, which includes poultry, are commonly used as the guinea pigs for testing and studying different disease, and developing vaccines to prevent disease. Should any VIRUS be an INVENTION? Should any human just be considered and referenced as just part of the herd, like a little chickadee or a guinea pig, or squashed bug? What's the difference between a peasant and a pheasant, or a chicken? What's in the moat? What's getting prepared and readied to be simmered for slaughter or sacrifice?

Has any one questioned just what in God's name any one is doing? Has any one questioned just why would any one INVENT a VIRUS? Why would any one want to make MONEY from INVENTING a VIRUS?

Again, has any one questioned just what in God's name any one is doing to make money in 2020?

Who cares?

I'd say there has been a pretty good job of promoting in an extremely public way (by using a cheap card trick called FEAR) for a few specific people, and off the top of my head, two names definitely pop-up to the top of the filter in my brain cells, to continue making a h_ _ _ of a lot of money, in many denominations, for an extremely limited number of human beings. The money is being generated from attacking the cellular structures of many other human beings, especially affecting any individual and group interpretation from a psychological awareness, and perceptions of individual emotional and physical states.

What a secretive approach to making money.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Joe Zammit-Lucia May 3, 2020

When you say 'for free' what does that mean? I'm assuming it means free at the point of consumption since doing all that you suggest will cost a lot of money. Who should carry those costs - and the opportunity costs of the displaced R&D and manufacturing of other stuff? Should that be taxpayer funded - in which case it is not 'free'.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Ralph Musgrave Apr 30, 2020

The above article is nothing more than statements of the obvious dressed up in pseudo technical language. The first para says we are lockdown. You don't say!

The second para says “Strong health systems, adequate testing capacity, and an effective, universally available vaccine will be key to protecting societies from COVID-19.” Zzzzzzz.

And I do like the bit where it says that to develop a vaccine we need “clearly defined common goal: developing an effective COVID-19 vaccine(s).” I have news: to make a cup of instant coffee, you need a “clearly defined goal”, the goal being to make a cup of instant coffee.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Michael Public Apr 28, 2020

My word. Even the hippies never had so much faith in the goodwill of others. Any vaccines will be private IP - sold for literally billions, available to friendly nations and not to China or Iran. This is simply how we roll.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Norman Kennedy Apr 28, 2020

This piece is wishful thinking. It is highly unlikely that there will be an effective vaccine within the next 12-18 months. Why, because this virus is very challenging to say the least. As for compulsory licencing, this notion would never work as the technology will be too complex. There will likely be several vaccines that will emerge but the only effective one will use a multi-pronged approach that does not rely on stimulating the immune system like the ineffective annual flu vaccine. As for 5 candidates currently in clinical trials they are mostly early stage 2. Phase 3 clinical trials alone will take 2 years not to mention the time required for regulatory approval. Success is always in the details and this takes time.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.