It occurred to me that most of the major vaccines seem to have become available to the public at the same time (roughly December, 2020). Pfizer, Moderna and AstraZeneca at the least (I did not check J&J).
I would think development of a vaccine would have some variation. Different labs, different people, different management, different manufacturing lines and processes and so on. Maybe one lab has smarter scientists or one gets a breakthrough before another one. Or one lab chooses the more promising approach before another lab. One company has a shorter supply chain in place to manufacture the vaccine or they have better government contacts to get approvals.
So many possible places for time differences to creep in and yet they all magically drop a vaccine to the public within days of each other?
There is so much complexity to designing a new vaccine with so many people involved in different companies with different approaches that variations are bound to occur and those things add up over the course of a year.
Runners who have trained to the top of human capability are bound to be close. But even there, if you had them run for a year, I bet you’d find a wider variation at the end too.
They are. Dozens of companies were working on vaccines and you are saying 3 of them getting approval within a month of each other is a strange coincidence. It’s not. The mRNA tech for Pfizer and Moderna gave them an edge. Similarly the adeno virus tech of the AZ.
I’m not sure the variations add up - if one company is faster at one aspect of the process, and another company is faster at a different aspect of the process, those differences cancel out. Also, the first company might suffer from some supply chain issues - but by the time the later companies get to the point of needing those supplies, the first company’s demands have led to increased supply, so some of that difference cancels out too.
My understanding is that development of all the vaccines didn’t take that long, just the trials. The big vaccines all started trails in late Spring/Early summer last year.
Right, but what I’m saying is that it wasn’t like the companies were all toiling away in the lab until December and then they all suddenly said “Eureka!” at the same time.
What you are saying is akin to a chemist pulling some random chemicals off a shelf, mixing them, and then saying they made a new chemical in a day. That may be true but it is unlikely that chemical will be what they want. And they have to take time to test that random chemical.
So, there is more to it than being able to whip something out in a day and the testing is a critical part of the process.
The technologies being used are, more or less, “platforms” into which the required genetic code can be incorporated fairly easily and that platform was under development for some time.
When the sequence for C19 was identified it was never going to take too long to get a working vaccine together ready for a clinical trial and the leading contenders were racing at the maximum possible speed so not surprising that trials for the leading contenders were ready to start at roughly the same time.
The trials themselves were of different sizes, in different populations, with different challenges but were always likely to take roughly the same time to get to a point of submission.
So not too surprising that there were a few vaccines ready at roughly the same time which represents probably the very shortest possible time from conception to market. The front runners were probably coming up against the limits of the shortest possible critical path.
Think of it this way. If you asked vendors to design you a warplane from scratch in peacetime you’d probably see extended development periods over many years and you’d be surprised to see several them ready to fly within a week or two of each other.
In wartime, with all brakes off and all efforts concentrated and maximised it would be less of a surprise to see a couple of options delivered within a few weeks of each other after, say, six months.
Is this something they all worked together on and shared the final info rather than each trying to do it on their own? Or did governments figure it out then handed the info to whoever wanted it?
The trials had to take a certain amount of time. If they started them fairly closely, they would finish the trial times fairly closely. And J&J was approved until late February IIRC
It was released by the Chinese labs, and mRNA vaccine candidates were available around 2 weeks later.
There were some people observing that the Chinese could have released the data a bit earlier, because they had their epidemic a bit earlier, but overall, the community was not outraged with the flow of information coming out of China.
If the Chinese had not released the data when they did, then somebody else would have done so soon after, which would have looked very bad for the Chinese. Because by that time study had started in other places. On the other hand, the first non-Chinese data might have been from a private lab, and might not have been released, so public release of the Chinese data (even if it was perhaps an unknown couple of weeks late) was a righteous social good that nobody was complaining about.
