Whose patents?
5 Likes
You said the FDA delayed Moderna and favored Pfizer, attributed to “dirty tricks to benefit big companies with connections”.
I’m saying, it wasn’t some “dirty trick” or FDA bias that allowed Pfizer to navigate the process better. It was that Pfizer simply had more experience navigating the process. More experience running trials, collecting the data, building the FDA submissions, putting it all together in a robust package.
Moderna got there, it just took more time. Size and experience is a big part of this.
The underlying actual vaccine from Moderna is just as good as Pfizer, neither has an advantage over the other.
Whenever and for whatever Moderna’s next one is, they’ll be better at the process based on this experience. Plus, they’ll have boatloads of money to throw at the next one too.
4 Likes
We have no shortage of vaccine - just shortage of people who wanted to take it to bring it under control. I don’t know what the ruckus is.
I respect your viewpoint. I’ll keep the tinfoil hat on. I’ve seen too much 
I challenge you to find a drug or medical device company in the US who doesn’t have former FDA staffers on the payroll. The reality is the industry experience helps FDA reviewers understand the field and vice-versa.
The conflict of interest that people infer is much more rare in reality than in their imagination.
3 Likes
Sorry, what’s implied here is that Pfizer happened to have more influence on FDA decisions than Moderna. I shouldn’t say that it’s an exception to have these kind of connections. It’s a small world.
But I remain convinced that the decision was not based on scientific finding. We needed the vaccine, and this was unnecessarily cruel thing to do.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
