On Sun, 18 Apr 2021 10:01:46 -0400, jmcquown wrote:

> On 4/18/2021 9:30 AM, Gary wrote:
>> On 4/17/2021 11:36 PM, Alex wrote:
>>> John Kuthe wrote:
>>>> And the second in a month after on 5/19.
>>>>
>>>> John Kuthe, RN, BSN...
>>>
>>>
>>> They are all "FREE" dipshit.* I'm ten years younger than you and I have
>>> had both shots.* As a "healthcare worker", what took you so long?
>>
>> Yes...they're all free in 2021 for any usain.
>>
>> Saw a soundbite on the news the other day. One company is now saying
>> after the 2 shots, you'll need to get a booster shot the next year and
>> then probably an annual shot after that.* LOL
>>
>> They aren't fools.* They've got everyone scared now and they won't let
>> that go...it's a cash cow.
>
> You're not taking into account the cost of R&D, manufacturing and
> distribution of those free vaccines. That's not cheap!

They were given $2 billion each by the Feds. And the process they
used was pretty easy. Phizer and Moderna beat NovaVax to market with
NovaVax's own technique (spike protein), invented 15-20 year ago.
NovaVax even had the first success with this one but they couldn't
even mass produce enough for trials. Phizer and Moderna had the
facilities to crank it out, NovaVax didn't.

> Once this wave of Covid-19 is over, if it ever is, (the virus keeps
> shifting, like other strains of the flu) it will be like getting any
> other type of annual flu shot.

But much more important. Because 15-25% of the adult population
won't even get vaccinated. They still need something for children,
too.

-swsw

On Fri, 23 Apr 2021 09:35:23 -0500, Sqwertz >
wrote:

>On Sun, 18 Apr 2021 10:01:46 -0400, jmcquown wrote:
>
>> On 4/18/2021 9:30 AM, Gary wrote:
>>> On 4/17/2021 11:36 PM, Alex wrote:
>>>> John Kuthe wrote:
>>>>> And the second in a month after on 5/19.
>>>>>
>>>>> John Kuthe, RN, BSN...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> They are all "FREE" dipshit.* I'm ten years younger than you and I have
>>>> had both shots.* As a "healthcare worker", what took you so long?
>>>
>>> Yes...they're all free in 2021 for any usain.
>>>
>>> Saw a soundbite on the news the other day. One company is now saying
>>> after the 2 shots, you'll need to get a booster shot the next year and
>>> then probably an annual shot after that.* LOL
>>>
>>> They aren't fools.* They've got everyone scared now and they won't let
>>> that go...it's a cash cow.
>>
>> You're not taking into account the cost of R&D, manufacturing and
>> distribution of those free vaccines. That's not cheap!
>
>They were given $2 billion each by the Feds. And the process they
>used was pretty easy. Phizer and Moderna beat NovaVax to market with
>NovaVax's own technique (spike protein), invented 15-20 year ago.
>NovaVax even had the first success with this one but they couldn't
>even mass produce enough for trials. Phizer and Moderna had the
>facilities to crank it out, NovaVax didn't.

Pfizer was not part of Warp Speed. The feds did have an agreement to
PURCHASE doses if they proved effective, but they were not funded like
Moderna & AStraZeneca.
>
>> Once this wave of Covid-19 is over, if it ever is, (the virus keeps
>> shifting, like other strains of the flu) it will be like getting any
>> other type of annual flu shot.
>
>But much more important. Because 15-25% of the adult population
>won't even get vaccinated. They still need something for children,
>too.
>
Testing in ongoing with those under 16, pregnant, or other special
needs that might be affected, but not have been included in original
testing.

On Fri, 23 Apr 2021 15:26:14 -0400, Boron Elgar wrote:

> On Fri, 23 Apr 2021 09:35:23 -0500, Sqwertz >
> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 18 Apr 2021 10:01:46 -0400, jmcquown wrote:

>>> You're not taking into account the cost of R&D, manufacturing and
>>> distribution of those free vaccines. That's not cheap!
>>
>>They were given $2 billion each by the Feds. And the process they
>>used was pretty easy. Phizer and Moderna beat NovaVax to market with
>>NovaVax's own technique (spike protein), invented 15-20 year ago.
>>NovaVax even had the first success with this one but they couldn't
>>even mass produce enough for trials. Phizer and Moderna had the
>>facilities to crank it out, NovaVax didn't.
>
> Pfizer was not part of Warp Speed. The feds did have an agreement to
> PURCHASE doses if they proved effective, but they were not funded like
> Moderna & AStraZeneca.

Huh. I didn't know that. So Phizer is selling doses to the
government at prices that don't account for the $2 billion front
money? That was an excellent <ahem> move on their part. They can
claim their funding was private and markups appropriately in
perpetuity.

Like I said, the tech was already there courtesy of NovaVax - it was
easy to develop. Phizer probably even already had it before Warp
Speed. So why take a $2B up front contract? Drug companies suck
[money].

-sw

On Sat, 24 Apr 2021 05:37:56 -0500, Sqwertz >
wrote:

>On Fri, 23 Apr 2021 15:26:14 -0400, Boron Elgar wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 23 Apr 2021 09:35:23 -0500, Sqwertz >
>> wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 18 Apr 2021 10:01:46 -0400, jmcquown wrote:
>
>>>> You're not taking into account the cost of R&D, manufacturing and
>>>> distribution of those free vaccines. That's not cheap!
>>>
>>>They were given $2 billion each by the Feds. And the process they
>>>used was pretty easy. Phizer and Moderna beat NovaVax to market with
>>>NovaVax's own technique (spike protein), invented 15-20 year ago.
>>>NovaVax even had the first success with this one but they couldn't
>>>even mass produce enough for trials. Phizer and Moderna had the
>>>facilities to crank it out, NovaVax didn't.
>>
>> Pfizer was not part of Warp Speed. The feds did have an agreement to
>> PURCHASE doses if they proved effective, but they were not funded like
>> Moderna & AStraZeneca.
>
>Huh. I didn't know that. So Phizer is selling doses to the
>government at prices that don't account for the $2 billion front
>money? That was an excellent <ahem> move on their part. They can
>claim their funding was private and markups appropriately in
>perpetuity.
>
>Like I said, the tech was already there courtesy of NovaVax - it was
>easy to develop. Phizer probably even already had it before Warp
>Speed. So why take a $2B up front contract? Drug companies suck
>[money].
>
>-sw

Drug companies suck as do most for profit businesses and do the same
with govt money grubbing because politicians funded by pharmas have
consistently voted against allowing the Feds to even negotiate some
aspects of drug pricing, especially for programs such as Medicare and
Medicaid. Most countries outside the US have tighter controls on
costs.

Another example of this is right before our eyes now, but the EU seems
as wretched as the US about it- There is a pandemic and the governing
agencies of many countries are refusing to make patent exemptions for
vaccines so poorer countries can produce them locally and cheaply. No
need to let the dogs out- any pandemic exceptions can be tightly
fenced.

I do not feel more animus towards drug companies in general (ok...I
make an exception for Purdue Pharma) than I do with something such as
Amazon.

On 4/24/2021 6:32 AM, Boron Elgar wrote:
> On Sat, 24 Apr 2021 05:37:56 -0500, Sqwertz >
> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 23 Apr 2021 15:26:14 -0400, Boron Elgar wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 23 Apr 2021 09:35:23 -0500, Sqwertz >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, 18 Apr 2021 10:01:46 -0400, jmcquown wrote:
>>
>>>>> You're not taking into account the cost of R&D, manufacturing and
>>>>> distribution of those free vaccines. That's not cheap!
>>>>
>>>> They were given $2 billion each by the Feds. And the process they
>>>> used was pretty easy. Phizer and Moderna beat NovaVax to market with
>>>> NovaVax's own technique (spike protein), invented 15-20 year ago.
>>>> NovaVax even had the first success with this one but they couldn't
>>>> even mass produce enough for trials. Phizer and Moderna had the
>>>> facilities to crank it out, NovaVax didn't.
>>>
>>> Pfizer was not part of Warp Speed. The feds did have an agreement to
>>> PURCHASE doses if they proved effective, but they were not funded like
>>> Moderna & AStraZeneca.
>>
>> Huh. I didn't know that. So Phizer is selling doses to the
>> government at prices that don't account for the $2 billion front
>> money? That was an excellent <ahem> move on their part. They can
>> claim their funding was private and markups appropriately in
>> perpetuity.
>>
>> Like I said, the tech was already there courtesy of NovaVax - it was
>> easy to develop. Phizer probably even already had it before Warp
>> Speed. So why take a $2B up front contract? Drug companies suck
>> [money].
>>
>> -sw
>
> Drug companies suck as do most for profit businesses and do the same
> with govt money grubbing because politicians funded by pharmas have
> consistently voted against allowing the Feds to even negotiate some
> aspects of drug pricing, especially for programs such as Medicare and
> Medicaid. Most countries outside the US have tighter controls on
> costs.
>
> Another example of this is right before our eyes now, but the EU seems
> as wretched as the US about it- There is a pandemic and the governing
> agencies of many countries are refusing to make patent exemptions for
> vaccines so poorer countries can produce them locally and cheaply. No
> need to let the dogs out- any pandemic exceptions can be tightly
> fenced.
>
> I do not feel more animus towards drug companies in general (ok...I
> make an exception for Purdue Pharma) than I do with something such as
> Amazon.
>


Patents are on a country by country basis. If a poorer country wants a
patent exemption, it can do so and the EU has nothing to say about it.

On Sat, 24 Apr 2021 07:29:01 -0700, Taxed and Spent
> wrote:

>On 4/24/2021 6:32 AM, Boron Elgar wrote:
>> On Sat, 24 Apr 2021 05:37:56 -0500, Sqwertz >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 23 Apr 2021 15:26:14 -0400, Boron Elgar wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 23 Apr 2021 09:35:23 -0500, Sqwertz >
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, 18 Apr 2021 10:01:46 -0400, jmcquown wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> You're not taking into account the cost of R&D, manufacturing and
>>>>>> distribution of those free vaccines. That's not cheap!
>>>>>
>>>>> They were given $2 billion each by the Feds. And the process they
>>>>> used was pretty easy. Phizer and Moderna beat NovaVax to market with
>>>>> NovaVax's own technique (spike protein), invented 15-20 year ago.
>>>>> NovaVax even had the first success with this one but they couldn't
>>>>> even mass produce enough for trials. Phizer and Moderna had the
>>>>> facilities to crank it out, NovaVax didn't.
>>>>
>>>> Pfizer was not part of Warp Speed. The feds did have an agreement to
>>>> PURCHASE doses if they proved effective, but they were not funded like
>>>> Moderna & AStraZeneca.
>>>
>>> Huh. I didn't know that. So Phizer is selling doses to the
>>> government at prices that don't account for the $2 billion front
>>> money? That was an excellent <ahem> move on their part. They can
>>> claim their funding was private and markups appropriately in
>>> perpetuity.
>>>
>>> Like I said, the tech was already there courtesy of NovaVax - it was
>>> easy to develop. Phizer probably even already had it before Warp
>>> Speed. So why take a $2B up front contract? Drug companies suck
>>> [money].
>>>
>>> -sw
>>
>> Drug companies suck as do most for profit businesses and do the same
>> with govt money grubbing because politicians funded by pharmas have
>> consistently voted against allowing the Feds to even negotiate some
>> aspects of drug pricing, especially for programs such as Medicare and
>> Medicaid. Most countries outside the US have tighter controls on
>> costs.
>>
>> Another example of this is right before our eyes now, but the EU seems
>> as wretched as the US about it- There is a pandemic and the governing
>> agencies of many countries are refusing to make patent exemptions for
>> vaccines so poorer countries can produce them locally and cheaply. No
>> need to let the dogs out- any pandemic exceptions can be tightly
>> fenced.
>>
>> I do not feel more animus towards drug companies in general (ok...I
>> make an exception for Purdue Pharma) than I do with something such as
>> Amazon.
>>
>
>
>Patents are on a country by country basis. If a poorer country wants a
>patent exemption, it can do so and the EU has nothing to say about it.

Go take it up with the news reports. WTO is involved in some places,
too. I am not googling deeper than this. There are hundreds or
articles, domestic and overseas, that have covered aspects of it.

https://www.moroccoworldnews.com/202...r-eu-use-only/

https://www.reuters.com/article/heal...-idUSL4N2KV4ZD