Good news on vaccines

Uncategorized 1 Minute

WSJ Biden estimates Vaccine for all adults by late May

Previously, based on production of Pfizer and Moderna vaccines, it was estimated that enough vaccine for all adults would be on hand by mid July, but with J&J now approved, and the agreement between J&J and Merck to increase production, the estimate has been revised to the end of May.

Merck learned late last year that its vaccine candidate was a dud and reached out to J&J to assist in production, much as Sanofi and Novartis did with Pfizer last fall when their vaccine efforts disappointed. J&J and Merck reached an agreement to cooperate as soon as J&J was approved by the FDA.

Novavax, assisted by Baxter and Endo International, will similarly cooperate but it is likely that vaccine will come too late to be used in the US.

Vaccine cooperation

Published by Don Tabor

I am a former Chairman of the Tidewater Libertarian Party and was the 2007 LP candidate for the 14th district VA Senate. Previously, I was the Volunteer State Director for the FairTax. I am married 50 years with two grown children and 5 grandchildren.

Published

49 thoughts on “Good news on vaccines”

  1. One does wonder when J&J will sue Merck claiming that they took advantage of methods learned in the production of the vaccine in the future development of something by Merck.

    I say by end of 2023.

    Like

    Reply

        1. No, no. Don’t get me wrong. This is great news on two fronts; 1) we get the vaccine, and 2) a massive lawsuit presents a future investment opportunity.

          Liked by 1 person

          Reply

    2. I’m going to guess they have lawyers involved in negotiating the details.

      From what I have been able to find out, Merck will be designating two of its plants to the effort, one of which is dedicated to filling and packaging the product. I’m not sure of the other but I think it makes the cell cultures used in the process.

      I doubt the proprietary processes will be farmed out.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

  2. Maybe those who have been free and easy with their claims that no Democratic administration could work successfully with the Pharma companies on vaccinations will retract and acknowledge what nonsense that was. It is clear that the Biden administration played an important part in getting these two companies to this agreement. I won’t hold my breath.

    https://www.npr.org/2021/03/03/973117712/how-the-white-house-got-2-pharma-foes-to-work-together-on-covid-19-vaccine

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    1. Well, I guess you could credit Biden with not killing the deal. NPR cheerleaders notwithstanding, this arrangement predates Biden.

      As the WSJ articles show, J&J were discussing the cooperative agreement since early January and the cooperation between rival manufacturers to produce the successful vaccines has been going on since last fall. It really just makes good business sense for those whose products failed development to get in on production of those which succeed to mutual benefit.

      Which is why I didn’t credit Trump with the deal even though it clearly hatched while he was in office. No President gets credit, it’s just business.

      As is often the case, when Democrats see a parade, they run to the front with a baton.

      Like

      Reply

      1. Like I said, I was not holding my breath waiting for you to retract the bullshit you spread on this subject the other day.

        I did not try to give Biden any more credit than he is due. He played an important part in making this happen. It may be “just business” but the government helped grease the wheels including a role in the negotiations and President Biden’s use of the DPA.

        After four years of spinning away failure after failure you have obviously changed gears and will now be spinning away success after success.

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

          1. “Was a time machine employed?”

            Are you suggesting I just made that up? Uh, that would be you projecting how you support your opinions – you know, alternative facts.

            It is obvious that in spite of your snarky comments about NPR you did not read the report that you derided.

            Here is an excerpt . . .

            “The resulting agreement came with an invocation of the DPA that helped accelerate some J&J vaccine deliveries to May that had earlier been set for June. It also will provide assistance to Merck. President Biden announced J&J would be running its U.S. facilities “24/7″ to speed vaccine out the door.

            Merck said it would receive up to $268.8 million in government funding to make adjustments to its facilities, where it will fill vials with J&J’s vaccine and eventually also produce the drug substance used in the J&J vaccine.”

            Liked by 1 person

          3. Let’s try to stick to the facts.

            Biden did not “invoke” the DPA authority which would allow him to compel whatever he felt needed to be done. That does not mean he did not use it. He did. Talk softly and carry a big stick – in this case the DPA authority to require cooperation. And, as reported by NPR, he did invoke the separate DPA authority to finance the needed capacity buildup.

            https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/03/politics/biden-merck-johnson–johnson-dpa/index.html

            I am not sure what your point about the FDA approval might be? Of course FDA approval was a sine qua non for manufacturing the vaccine. But, I think I get it. The FDA was your excuse for some of Trump’s failures and now you want to give it credit for one of Biden’s successes. If so, that is a dog that won’t hunt. For whatever reason, it appears that the President and the FDA are now singing from the same hymnal – something Trump seemed unable to pull off.

            Like

      2. …” I guess you could credit Biden with not killing the deal. ”

        According to the reporting, a phone call at the END OF FEBRUARY, between the J&J and the BIDEN administration ran over an hour and produced the agreement for vaccine production.

        “No President gets credit, it’s just business.”

        If this had gotten done under T****, you and others here would have trumpeted the accomplishment. IMO, both deserve some credit for making the deal happen.

        Yes it started under T**** (kind of like Obama and the economy), but it took action by the Biden administration to get the deal done.

        And as is often the case, you just have to display your hatred for anything Democratic, including small “d” democracy,

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

        1. No, it didn’t take action by Biden, it took the FDA issuing the EUA that made administering the vaccinations legal.

          J&J and Merck were ready as soon as the vaccine was approved.

          Whatever do you think Biden had to do to get the parties to engage in a mutually beneficial deal they had already worked out?

          Like

          Reply

          1. But it hadn’t been worked out. Biden administration officials pushed for it during the late February phone call.

            You just can’t admit when something is done right. And even the few times you do, it is like pulling teeth (pun absolutely intended).

            Like

          2. What evidence is there beyond a Biden appointee’s statement that there was anything decisive done by anyone outside of J&J and Merck?

            I’ve heard a claim of credit, but nothing of any unresolved issues that needed deciding.

            Like

          3. …”it took the FDA issuing the EUA that made administering the vaccinations legal.”

            Step 1, yes. However, as much as you want to believe that the deal would have been done as quickly without the Biden administration pushing J&J and MERCK across the finish line, you are mistaken.

            “J&J and Merck were ready as soon as the vaccine was approved.”

            I do not believe that OPINION is based in truth. Like your assertion that Northam is paying off political allies, it is conjecture.

            Like

    2. LMAO…Suuuuuurrrree. I predicted some left wing idiots would try to claim credit for Trumps success with Op Warp Speed and it only took a month for ignorant claims that Biden did something. All he has done is sit on his glutes, watch and thankfully didn’t interfere. Even Biden admin agrees Trump gets all credit.
      https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.foxnews.com/media/trump-administration-breathtaking-operation-warp-speed-success-nih-director.amp

      Like

      Reply

      1. OWS was a good thing to do. I have said so many times. That does not change the fact that by the time Trump left office the pandemic response by the government was floundering and the federal plan to distribute vaccines was virtually non-existent.

        And, as a reminder, the vaccines were developed in other countries and that would have happened with or without OWS.

        Trump has been good at only one thing in his entire sorry life – gaslighting the weak-minded. At that he is very, very good. While he is playing golf at Mar-a-Lago, hundreds of his faithful will be cooling their heals in prison for the sedition he planted in their sorry little heads.

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

        1. What planet have you been vacationing on? Distribution depenon FDA approvals and supply and that machinery, including J&J, was already in place BEFORE Biden took office. What you see now is from OWS. Biden didn’t do squat.

          Like

          Reply

          1. “What you see now is from OWS. ”

            Not really. But if it makes you feel better to say so, then OK.

            But you are not accurate in your assessment. The DPA gave them the impetus to go into 24/7 production. That was not a OWS factor; it was a DPA factor. And T*** couldn’t even spell it, let alone employ it properly.

            Liked by 1 person

    3. I guess I was too quick in crediting Biden for at least not screwing things up.

      He has now extended that idiotic “teachers first” priority nationwide in spite of solid evidence there is no need. He caved to the teacher’s unions just like Northam.

      Like

      Reply

      1. I get it. You don’t feel that teachers fall into the category of “essential workers”.

        Well for folks who are unable, either because of having to work or not being capable of homeschooling their children, having teachers that feel SAFE enough to do their jobs makes them essential.jobs

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

        1. The evidence shows that teachers are in no more danger of infection than other workers. They are elbowing their way to the front of the line because they have the clout, not the need.

          Like

          Reply

      2. “Solid evidence there is no need”

        Simply not true. Constant interaction in closed spaces with people who may well be carriers of the virus carries risks. Catching this virus – even if you survive – is a BFD. As a society we are demanding that teachers face these risks that others can avoid. Along with that demand should come whatever protection we can offer. The fact that you disagree with protecting them does not make it idiotic to do so.

        By the way, contrary to what you seem to think based on past examples in your rants on this subject, teachers are not all 25 year-olds in perfect health.

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

        1. While you might think teacher would face elevated risk, studies by Duke University and the experience of the Catholic schools show us that is not the case.

          As Feynman tells us, “if it disagrees with experiment, it is wrong.?

          Like

          Reply

          1. Uh, define elevated risk. Elevated compared to what? I do not need an experiment to compare MY risk with the risk of someone who is required to mix with people all day, every day in the closed environment of the classroom. I am sheltering in place and face zero risk. That teacher is facing much higher risk. The risk they face may be similar to other jobs and not as bad as, say, a bartender, but that is not the relevant comparison. The relevant comparison is with people over 65 who can protect themselves as I have been doing until they get the vaccine.

            Liked by 1 person

          2. You’re speculating based on a priori assumptions.

            The issue has been tested by experience and the risk that reasonably appeared to exist turned out not to be there.

            Is your assumption disagrees with experience, however reasonable it might seem, it is wrong.

            Like

          3. “You’re speculating based on a priori assumptions.”

            Uh, no. Care to try again, Mr. Science.

            I am not speculating in the least. The virus is transmitted principally in droplets in the exhalations of people with the virus. That is not an assumption. That is a fact. It follows, that those who avoid being in the presence of other people have zero risk while those who cannot avoid being around other people have more than zero risk.

            Did you deliberately miss the point and not answer the question? “Elevated risk” compared to what? Other people who expose themselves to other people? For the sake of argument, let’s stipulate that teachers are not at “elevated risk” compared to people working in other professions. They ARE at elevated risk compared to retirees who can shelter at home. That is NOT speculation.

            I keep telling you this, but you seem unable to get it. Having different ideas and values than you is not the definition of being an “idiot.”

            Liked by 1 person

          4. First, not all Elders have the ability to shelter as you do. Many retirees have to do their own shopping and go to medical appointments.

            But what Northam and now, Biden, are doing is prioritizing teachers ahead of everyone, including those in the private sector whose jobs expose them far more.

            And in case you missed the sciencey part, if your theory disagrees with experience, it is wrong.

            Studies by Duke University and the experience of the Catholic schools have shown that teacher are not at risk of exposure in schools.

            Like

          5. “ not at risk of exposure in schools.”

            If you’re going to get all “sciencey” yourself. Read the report findings from Duke and don’t overstate them to try and make your point.

            Yeah, they should open schools due to minimum risk. However, you can’t open without teachers and if they won’t go back without a shot you give them their fucking shots….regardless.

            Liked by 2 people

          6. We shouldn’t negotiate with terrorists.

            Seriously, the remedy for an employee who won’t come to work unless unreasonable demands are met is not to submit to them but to replace them.

            Like

          8. Apply the same reasoning to auto parts clerks and ambulance attendants.

            No one else is that privileged, Anyone else at similar risk would either show up for work or be replaced.

            Like

          9. “Studies by Duke University and the experience of the Catholic schools have shown that teacher are not at risk of exposure in schools.”

            Uh, I keep telling you this but you will not pay attention. You do not get your own facts. Those studies do not show that teachers “are not at risk of exposure in schools.” I think they show that they are not at “elevated risk” compared to other people in their age group. Quite different.

            MOST elders who are not in care CAN shelter in place and ELIMINATE their risk as I do. It is a choice. Essential workers – like teachers – do not have the luxury of that choice.

            Liked by 1 person

          11. Re “remedy”

            Easier said than done. Having herded cats for a living I can attest that the repercussions of such action would prove disastrous.

            PS: we negotiate with terrorists constantly; life isn’t a Hollywood movie.

            Liked by 1 person

        2. “Air Traffic Controllers”

          Uppity teachers want vaccination so they reduce the risk of killing themselves and family members when we require them to teach in person? Easy Peasy. Fire them. Fire them all. Simple.

          Interesting that you celebrate the moment in history when our country began its slide into the economically dysfunctional mess we find ourselves in today.

          Liked by 1 person

          Reply

          1. What about auto parts clerks, or convenience store clerks? They have at least as much risk as teachers. Why are their families less important?

            Because they don’t belong to a public employee union?

            Public employee unions should either have collective bargaining or political participation, but not both.

            Like

          2. “What about auto parts clerks, or convenience store clerks”…

            If I could find a big yellow flag emoji, I’d be posting it here and now.

            I work in a similar environment as those clerks and I take several precautions throughout the day. I am not locked in a classroom with a bunch of other individuals with limited ventilation. The comparison come off as ludicrous on its face.

            Liked by 1 person

          3. And yet the auto parts clerk, by experience, is of equal or more risk.

            Early on, we speculated they might be at higher risk, but experience has proven that not to be the case.

            Like

          4. What about them?

            Reopening schools for in-person classrooms is a decision made by the political leaders of the state. If we the people – through our representatives – are going to REQUIRE that people take a risk we owe it to them to protect them. And even if YOU think that they are exaggerating the risk, the point is that THEY think the risk is one they do not want to take.

            Your suggestion that public employees cannot participate in politics if they engage in collective bargaining is based on exactly what principle? Besides the fact that you don’t like collective bargaining?

            Liked by 1 person

          6. The point is that if the auto parts clerk doesn’t show up for work, his employer replaces him with someone who will.

            Teachers are our employees, and if they make irrational demands to return to work they should be replaced.

            Public employees, by influencing elections, are both negotiating with management and choosing the managers.

            Like

Leave a comment