Now do all your math with a realistic number. 30% fatality rate is not in any way typical for the elderly. That’s not even typical for obese diabetic elderly people. So many people saying “if I get it, I’m dead for sure!” Well, you’re not.
Apologies, my number was sourced from this graph which is based on CFR, not IFR so it’s significantly overestimated but the point is not dependant on any exact number, the math still remains the same. There’s a 1000x difference in relative fatality, just stratified by age and independent of co-morbidities.
Ok. You also realize that just by their nature, vaccines are usually much less effective in the elderly. So mass producing an untested vaccine so we can rush it to the elderly is wrong headed from the other direction too.
That’s ignoring the long term public health effects of putting out an unsafe vaccine. Antivaxxers will not be fringe anymore.
I’m not sure which version of “the West” you are thinking of, but it sure as heck isn’t the one I live in. Perhaps the “Wild West” or West of the Mississippi, but other than some weird channelling of the new right most of us don’t live there.
Anyone with a clue had a pretty good idea what was coming. Politicians, well they are another matter. You get what you vote for. Lunatic anti-vaxxers and other fringe fools do not define a society.
Most people tend to consider Russia as part of the West. I think they tend to think of themselves that way more than not. Culturally they are much more aligned with Europe than the opposite. Certainly those Russians I know would be of that view.
From a scientific point of view there is little that a utilitarian view could have on accelerating vaccine development. Even if they filled the population of their prisons with the vaccine, they still have to wait to discover the effects. Just trialling on more people doesn’t really help. As the adage goes, 9 women cannot make a child in one month. Testing for long term harm requires time, and tests for efficacy take time. The big time risk to take to accelerate a vaccine into production is financial, and is the one being taken by every manufacturer right now. Assume it is going to work and start the work to start production. You may lose many many millions of dollars if it fails to work. But start now. That gets you an effective and safe vaccine as fast as any path. Pulling unethical stunts doesn’t get you a vaccine in production quantities any faster. For the Russians it is no different. They have indicated that their production capabilities won’t be churning out their vaccine until early next year. Surprise! They are no further advanced than anyone else. The announcement is just window dressing on the political stage.
OTOH, your view of blame ethics is spot on. 
This seems like the same cutting-corners approach that gave us Chernobyl.
I am convinced by this line of reasoning. And even in the worst-case scenario, it certainly wouldn’t be anywhere near the first time in our response to this pandemic that we tried an approach that could cause more harm than good.
If it involves rolling out a vaccine without a proper phase 3 trial to adequately judge efficacy and safety, it is by definition reckless.
That’s not “Western prejudice”, any more than there’s such a thing as “Western science”. There’s only good and bad science.
Politicize the scientific process, and the odds of bad science increase dramatically.
Let the Russians be guinea pigs in this instance. I feel sorry for whatever groups won’t have a choice in the matter.