The fuel injected Brexiter comments on the EU's vaccine problems miss many points.

1) no-one wanted to get out of the EU or the single market to protect ourselves better against a pandemic. See Brexit Tory controlled government policy 2016-2020 regarding the NHS and pandemic preparedness.
2) we could have, and, perhaps thanks to the need to genuflect to nationalists, or out of pragmatic needs, chosen to go our own way on procurement even within the EU.
3) none of this explains why it's good to be outside the single market, restricting our trade and making us poorer.
4) the implicit celebration of the vaccine nationalist cause, seemingly [but not actually] permitted by Brexit, ignores how this game plays out, namely:
a) the EU retalliates with sanctions now or in the future.
b) we expose ourselves to mishaps in our domestic supply chains of the vaccine production we delightedly hold onto as 'ours'.
c) this is not a one-shot game. We are into a perpetual period of mutation, vaccine tweaking, vaccine delivery. We may be unlucky in not devising and manufacturing good tweaks and need to spread the innovation risk globally.
If anyone wants me to write 'Vaccination nationalism: not a one shot game' for their paper/magazine, obvs I am nearly there as I have the pun headline sorted.
It's actually a really nice econ teaching topic, as it brings together specialization, risk management under uncertainty, game theory, time consistency, political economy, international relations. Normal trade policy but on acid.
The interesting bit of political economy is how the electoral horizon relates to the horizon at which we are fighting covid. A quick vaccine war concluded before 2024 could be great to get another term. But the payback and extra deaths would come later.

More from Brexit

They have started in the Scottish case

Looks like a near-concession that the side letter is Padfield-compliant

You May Also Like

@franciscodeasis https://t.co/OuQaBRFPu7
Unfortunately the "This work includes the identification of viral sequences in bat samples, and has resulted in the isolation of three bat SARS-related coronaviruses that are now used as reagents to test therapeutics and vaccines." were BEFORE the


chimeric infectious clone grants were there.https://t.co/DAArwFkz6v is in 2017, Rs4231.
https://t.co/UgXygDjYbW is in 2016, RsSHC014 and RsWIV16.
https://t.co/krO69CsJ94 is in 2013, RsWIV1. notice that this is before the beginning of the project

starting in 2016. Also remember that they told about only 3 isolates/live viruses. RsSHC014 is a live infectious clone that is just as alive as those other "Isolates".

P.D. somehow is able to use funds that he have yet recieved yet, and send results and sequences from late 2019 back in time into 2015,2013 and 2016!

https://t.co/4wC7k1Lh54 Ref 3: Why ALL your pangolin samples were PCR negative? to avoid deep sequencing and accidentally reveal Paguma Larvata and Oryctolagus Cuniculus?