Drareg
Member
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2016
- Messages
- 4,772
Has anyone read this book?
https://www.amazon.com/Deadliest-En...89036133&sprefix=Deadliest+ene,aps,246&sr=8-1
I was reading this article by a journalist I suspect is a shill by his views on DNA.
When will we get the Covid-19 vaccine? - UnHerd
Some quotes from the book author in the article-
"One trouble will be funding it. Pharma companies are throwing money at this at the moment, but they are in the end commercial enterprises, and vaccines are often not very commercial things: they are given once, and need to be given to people who can’t easily pay for it. Plus, they’ve been burned before — in his book Deadliest Enemy, the epidemiologist Mike Osterholm says that they rushed to get a vaccine for Sars in 2003, urged on by governments and philanthropic bodies; then, when Sars burnt itself out, the governments and philanthropic bodies lost interest"
"At Sanofi we rushed to make a Sars vaccine,” says Almond. “It got to the point we could test it in primates after 11 months, and by then it had gone away, and we’d spent tens of millions of euros on it never to get it back. The industry does it, but it knows it’s losing money, and it can’t do that too much.”
“I’m not sure how scarred pharma was by that,” says Shattock, “but they’ve certainly been bruised by other projects: Ebola, Sanofi with the dengue programme, GSK with malarial vaccines. They’re not seeing big returns.” It may be different with Covid-19 if it’s around for years, especially if it needs yearly doses, but it may not.
Osterholm in his book suggests that public-private partnerships — like the US defence contractor model, in which governments put out a specification for a jet fighter, and firms compete to build one in the knowledge that the most suitable will be richly rewarded — may be the best system. That’s probably for future outbreaks, though; this one will be driven by funding from the Gates Foundation, Wellcome, the World Bank, and by goodwill from the pharma companies. “Yes there’s a risk the companies will make a loss,” says Almond, “and on smaller things they might need incentivisation, but on this one they’ll dive in and do the best they can.”
I find these quotes alarming, governments put out a specification for a virus ,firms compete to build one in anticipation it will occur in the future.
So big pharma have been loosing money on vaccines and were losing interest in them because the payoff wasn’t guaranteed, they want more of a guarantee it will pay off and here we are in the midst of an exaggerated hysterical flu season.
https://www.amazon.com/Deadliest-En...89036133&sprefix=Deadliest+ene,aps,246&sr=8-1
I was reading this article by a journalist I suspect is a shill by his views on DNA.
When will we get the Covid-19 vaccine? - UnHerd
Some quotes from the book author in the article-
"One trouble will be funding it. Pharma companies are throwing money at this at the moment, but they are in the end commercial enterprises, and vaccines are often not very commercial things: they are given once, and need to be given to people who can’t easily pay for it. Plus, they’ve been burned before — in his book Deadliest Enemy, the epidemiologist Mike Osterholm says that they rushed to get a vaccine for Sars in 2003, urged on by governments and philanthropic bodies; then, when Sars burnt itself out, the governments and philanthropic bodies lost interest"
"At Sanofi we rushed to make a Sars vaccine,” says Almond. “It got to the point we could test it in primates after 11 months, and by then it had gone away, and we’d spent tens of millions of euros on it never to get it back. The industry does it, but it knows it’s losing money, and it can’t do that too much.”
“I’m not sure how scarred pharma was by that,” says Shattock, “but they’ve certainly been bruised by other projects: Ebola, Sanofi with the dengue programme, GSK with malarial vaccines. They’re not seeing big returns.” It may be different with Covid-19 if it’s around for years, especially if it needs yearly doses, but it may not.
Osterholm in his book suggests that public-private partnerships — like the US defence contractor model, in which governments put out a specification for a jet fighter, and firms compete to build one in the knowledge that the most suitable will be richly rewarded — may be the best system. That’s probably for future outbreaks, though; this one will be driven by funding from the Gates Foundation, Wellcome, the World Bank, and by goodwill from the pharma companies. “Yes there’s a risk the companies will make a loss,” says Almond, “and on smaller things they might need incentivisation, but on this one they’ll dive in and do the best they can.”
I find these quotes alarming, governments put out a specification for a virus ,firms compete to build one in anticipation it will occur in the future.
So big pharma have been loosing money on vaccines and were losing interest in them because the payoff wasn’t guaranteed, they want more of a guarantee it will pay off and here we are in the midst of an exaggerated hysterical flu season.