• MidgePhoto@photog.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    @merridew Interesting paper. On COVID I didn’t see the 4 billion in there, but I didn’t do adding up, either.
    I’ve ignored all the vaccines that are not mRNA for assorted reasons, but they must be potentially useful still.

    On Influenza, I think the capacity is greatly more than that, but much of it is potential and/or used for other purposes. Given a 1919-like strain we could ramp it up rapidly.

    • MidgePhoto@photog.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      @merridew
      …There are many things we could do, many of which are good or at least not bad, and deciding how much of each we do is a strange business.

      I think resource allocation and deployment could be done better, but I don’t have ambitions as planetary overlord or whatever.

      A while after I was born there were 4 billion of us*, and soon there will be 9 billion. Some things we should be able to do much more of and better, some we do, and some things we may need to share more widely.

      * ish

    • merridewOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      It’s under this heading:

      How is the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine being distributed?

      Pfizer has activated its extensive U.S. and European manufacturing network, including thousands of highly skilled U.S. workers in multiple states and localities, to prepare to produce the COVID-19 vaccine. We currently have the capacity to produce 4 billion doses annually, pending demand.

      Influenza they reckon could be scaled up to between 6-8 billion annually, if needed.

      • MidgePhoto@photog.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        @merridew sounds fair. Potential, easily available.
        Someone might chip in at this point, noting the suggested rate, to ask if we can think of anything else to spend G£400 on that might be more useful.
        And most of us would point to some sort of crossover, applying some resources to this and some to (those) other things.
        And then there are the loonies, quacks, and horrors with their views, but enough of them.

        I suspect …

          • merridewOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Well you are free to suspect that.

            But I’m not going to put the health of my family on hold pending the (impossible) total eradication of global health inequity.