Fast-tracking a vaccine has even some in the medical world spooked
Loading player...
Finding a vaccine against Covid-19 that works and can be distributed widely enough to help stop the pandemic is a global priority. Given the urgency, governments are doing all they can to fund research and incentivise firms to ramp up trials — pre-ordering doses, lowering regulatory barriers to market and granting manufacturers immunity from costly future injury-related lawsuits.
But when does the scramble for supply start to look like corner-cutting?
Even in a pandemic as deadly as this one, public trust in a vaccine is vulnerable. A July-August Ipsos worldwide poll for the World Economic Forum found that while three in four adults were interested in getting a Covid-19 vaccine if available, only 37% had a “strong” interest in doing so.
That’s a far cry from the estimated herd immunity threshold of 55% to 82%. The top two reasons cited for not wanting to take a Covid-19 vaccine are a fear of side effects and doubts it will actually work — not extreme “anti-vaxx” sentiment.
While an effective vaccine would be an unquestionable public good, you can see how fears of a rush job might take hold. Vladimir Putin’s shock approval last month of a vaccine before large-scale patient trials had been completed is a gamble that could actually set back Russia’s response to Covid-19, as my colleague Max Nisen has argued.
In the US, Donald Trump wants a vaccine rolled out before election day in November, sparking worries that an eventual green light will be seen as a political decision rather than one based on comprehensive data.
On top of that comes the practice of offering legal immunity to makers of vaccines and emergency treatments. While helpful in keeping companies from getting bogged down in court battles, it isn’t exactly conducive to building public trust.
For example, the US’s existing Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act shields firms from almost all injury-related lawsuits unless the cause is deemed wilful misconduct (a high bar). That’s an “extraordinarily broad” view, says Wendy Parmet, professor of law at Northeastern University. While financial compensation is available, it is covered entirely by the taxpayer, capped at a lifetime maximum of $311,810 regardless of the injury and decided by a special panel with no opportunity for judicial review.
It has served to pour fuel on anti-vaxxers’ outrage, rather than silence them.
No wonder some patient advocates have been spooked by lobbying pressure in Europe — ...
But when does the scramble for supply start to look like corner-cutting?
Even in a pandemic as deadly as this one, public trust in a vaccine is vulnerable. A July-August Ipsos worldwide poll for the World Economic Forum found that while three in four adults were interested in getting a Covid-19 vaccine if available, only 37% had a “strong” interest in doing so.
That’s a far cry from the estimated herd immunity threshold of 55% to 82%. The top two reasons cited for not wanting to take a Covid-19 vaccine are a fear of side effects and doubts it will actually work — not extreme “anti-vaxx” sentiment.
While an effective vaccine would be an unquestionable public good, you can see how fears of a rush job might take hold. Vladimir Putin’s shock approval last month of a vaccine before large-scale patient trials had been completed is a gamble that could actually set back Russia’s response to Covid-19, as my colleague Max Nisen has argued.
In the US, Donald Trump wants a vaccine rolled out before election day in November, sparking worries that an eventual green light will be seen as a political decision rather than one based on comprehensive data.
On top of that comes the practice of offering legal immunity to makers of vaccines and emergency treatments. While helpful in keeping companies from getting bogged down in court battles, it isn’t exactly conducive to building public trust.
For example, the US’s existing Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act shields firms from almost all injury-related lawsuits unless the cause is deemed wilful misconduct (a high bar). That’s an “extraordinarily broad” view, says Wendy Parmet, professor of law at Northeastern University. While financial compensation is available, it is covered entirely by the taxpayer, capped at a lifetime maximum of $311,810 regardless of the injury and decided by a special panel with no opportunity for judicial review.
It has served to pour fuel on anti-vaxxers’ outrage, rather than silence them.
No wonder some patient advocates have been spooked by lobbying pressure in Europe — ...