Originally Posted by Bipat

1)
2) Covax is the indigenous Indian vaccine. The contract is regarding price paid to the company.

Originally Posted by Boiler

EU tells six countries to lift Covid border restrictions
Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Hungary and Sweden put on notice over curbs to free movement

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...r-restrictions

Sounds like they need a common policy

Originally Posted by Steerpike

I think it's going to become one of the pressing issues of our time. I suspect it has to do with 'the internet' and how these days, anyone can post anything, and equally, anyone can find anything. So if I get it into my head that (eg) vaccines are bad, I can probably google it and find not just one or two but hundreds or thousands of sites catering to that line of thinking. Couple that with (eg) facebook's 'algorithms', which promote controversy / conflict because they've discovered that conflict drives engagement (and thus eyeballs, and thus advertising revenue ...), and we are riding into dangerous territory.

Edit To Add - thought more about this ... when you and I read about the 'fake moon landing', we had no incentive to believe it, and in fact (for me, at least), a strong desire to disbelieve it (being a science student, a space fan, etc). When I read about 'anti-vax', I don't want it to be true because I think it's important for society. But imagine if the opposite were true; imagine if all your friends DIS-believed these things, and you wanted to 'fit in'. There would be an incentive for you to find more 'proof' to support your 'theory'. I think that's what is going on these days. While the chances of finding a 'group' in your neighborhood that believed these things were true would be unlikely, the internet has made finding 'like minded people' more practical.

Edit To Add (2) - we were also brought up to 'respect authority'. If the doctor said 'this will make you better', most people simply trusted the doctor. Back then, there really wasn't much of an option to challenge the doctor anyway. These days, thanks to the internet, you can come home and 'research' (read google results and think you are being informed). It may start simple; at first, you realize that some other respectable doctor 'somewhere' has a slightly different opinion (let's assume a legit difference of opinion), and that is the first sign of realizing that your doctor is not 'perfect'. But then you start finding totally contradicting opinions, and ... depending on how smart/intelligent/discerning you are, you may or may not reject these contradictory opinions. But the ability to explore and find alternatives seems to be a major contributor.

Originally Posted by Expatrick

Covaxin (& Covishield) are the Indian vaccines, Covax is the international programme.

Originally Posted by Jsmth321

And when I was younger we were taught to challenge authority and question everything.

Originally Posted by Bipat

Yes, apologies you are correct--- (Getting mixed up with the 'Co's') Covaxin is the indigenous developed,

Covishield is the AstraZeneca 'Oxford'. (Sputnik V is still called Sputnik V as far as I know.) Both being produced --the latter not yet approved.

Originally Posted by Expatrick

I assume you mean not approved by India.

Originally Posted by Lion in Winter

All I can see out the window is freakin' snow

I'm just tired of everything being turned into a tribal battle when it's really just about collaboration and common sense, with a smattering of human decency.

We are getting lost in a host of straw men.

Originally Posted by Lion in Winter

It isn't an argument. Nor is it about first or second, but about large-scale priorities. Not everybody can get it "first", so the question becomes how the vaccines are distributed - in a concentrated way to the wealthy countries, and then to the poor countries, or evenly distrbuted across all countries as supplies become available. Economists and scientists have suggested that the latter method is the best way of containing the virus and the fallout. This is not just a humanitarian matter. If we fail to contain the virus in these poorer countries, there will be even more economic fallout in the richer countries.

https://www.newyorker.com/news/q-and...ound-the-world

There have been a number of articles on this.

Gosh, it's almost as though we, and our interests, were all interconnected....

Originally Posted by Scamp

Just give up. Being the workhouse of the world means you save it apparently, the irony being completely lost that it's one of the countries that could clearly do with the support.
You hit the nail on the head though, collaboration (using economies of scale and brains to research or produce), common sense to roll them out and some decency to share the excess, efforts, costs and benefits.

Originally Posted by Steerpike

So can we look at four countries that are, by all reasonable accounts, 'rich' for a moment, and discuss them in a simple manner. Let's take US, UK, Australia, NZ. The first two have wildly out of control virus situations, while the last two seem to be very much under control. It would seem to make a lot of sense to me to rush vaccines to US and UK, and delay vaccines to Australia and NZ (assuming not enough for everyone).

I'd much, much prefer to be in Aus or NZ right now, and not get a vaccine till Christmas, vs being in the US or UK and getting a vaccine much sooner. Maybe what I'm saying is, it should not be related to rich vs poor, but rather, countries that have high case loads vs those that don't.

Originally Posted by Bipat

You (and others) talk about "collaboration" ----"brains to research or produce"--etc.
Then mock those that are doing it.
What irony? What support clearly needed? (Yes Bill Gates has given support to help offset any major financial loss.)

(Cyrus Poonawalla promoted the philanthropic philosophies of easy accessibility of vaccines worldwide ---in other words affordable worldwide (nominated for Nobel prize in 2018.)
(Developed Rabishield ) Yes provided the brains to research AND produce.

Originally Posted by Bipat

You are an intelligent woman what in my posts do you disagree with? The UK has a high infection and death rate----should they immediately donate to countries that have a low infection and death rate?
(For heavens sake--- I am supporting the efforts of my other wealthy country in their donating and supplying----and they will also be supplying Canada along with USA).