Point 1. Pharmaceutical companies grouse that the flu vaccine business is not very profitable (if at all).
Point 2. CDC is tacitly charged with protecting public health.
So -
Should the government/CDC own it’s own flu vaccine manufacturing facility?
Profit motive is stripped away; pharmaceutical firms can concentrate on more
“profitable” products; the general public gets cheap vaccines with no shortages, since their facility is dedicated to flu vaccine production.
The CDC has neither the facilities, the expertise, nor the money to directly manufacture vaccines.
I suppose the more general question is how the government should go about improving vaccine availabilty and research, especially in this era when vaccine manufacture is relatively high risk, capital intensive, and low profit compared to other investment options open to big Pharma.
But this is my whole point.
How much would it cost to start up 1 facility dedicated to vaccine production?
$50M? $100M? $200M?
Seems to me you have the one time “investment” to start up and from then on you run it to break even (since it’s a “government” business).
I see no problem with locking out the big Pharmaceuticals since they don’t seem to
like being in the flu vaccine business anyway.
Expertise? You mean to say everyone who has this skill set is locked up in a
pharmaceutical firm? Maybe the government facility is built in say Georgia, and
maybe a bunch of pharma employees would like to relocate. (Locations are irrelevant, just used to illustrate the point that those with the needed skills could be wooed over).
As someone in a high-risk category (asthmatic) who has yet to be able to lay her hands on a dose of vaccine, as my employer’s on-site program has been cancelled for lack of vaccine and my doctor’s office says they will not be getting any because of the shortage, I’d say yes, there should be some more organized distribution mechanism in place than there already is.
What shape that might appropriately take, I have no idea. But don’t you think those at higher risk of complications should be able to get vaccinated before those who are likely to suffer no worse effects than a couple of days of feeling crappy and lying on the couch? I think my grandmother, who grew up fatherless because of the 1918 flu pandemic, would agree.
I heard a similar article on Wednesday on All Things Considered. An interesting comment was made that perhaps the government should take on the cost of making vaccines as a public health function, because the private sector is not appropriate financially. I thought that would be a good idea, but to take it further and make it a department (under the CDC, for instance)involved in making vaccines in general that pose a siginificant threat to public health, including biological weapons. As is the case now with drugs, non-government research that leads to the creation of a vaccine could be used by this department to manufacture large quantities for public distribution.
Vlad/Igor
No, I don’t think the CDC is the appropriate choice for vaccine maker, but I dont’ have time right now to go into all the reasons I feel that way.
Anyhow, consider this: the US flu vaccine is made (this year) by a British (Chiron) and a French (Aventis Pasteur) company. Ask yourself - why are there no US companies making flu vaccine? No, it may not be very profitable, but there would be a PR bonus if this was spun right and that’s worth something to most companies.
Answer: liability. Inject enough vaccine doses into healthy people and sooner or later someone will have a bad reaction. Then the reaction will be to sue the maker, whether at fault or no. Result: no US company is willing to make flu vaccine.
But no-one puts a gun to someones head to take a flu vaccine. Individuals make there own decision knowing there’s a risk.
Declare an exemption from lawsuits for this proposed CDC-run factory.
The key here is not be beholden to foreign (and profit-based) companies. Consider how public water utilities charge enough to cover costs. Treat this
new proposed company as a public utility.
On consideration there is some merit in vaccine manufacture and research/development being a governmental burden. There are definite problems as well. Price and availability to public vs private sector; conflicts when the entity that advises who should get the vaccine and approves the vacccine also manufactures it; adequate funding; etc. But this public/private collaboration is not working out so well.
Chiron is an American company. In fact, their headquarters are only a few miles from my house. It’s just that the plant used to make the flu vaccine is in Britain.
If an American wanted to sue Chiron, he would be able to.
Ed
I would say that, if you are willing to agree that there are some functions that the government should handle, and that the public health is one of them, then the feds should really look into vaccine production. Although I disagree with most parts of socialized medicine, it seems to me that this is an area that I can agree with.