The COVID-19 Vaccines Shouldn’t Have Been Free

Published

11 months ago

June 2, 2024

admin

In a recent essay in the journal Monash Bioethics Review, oncologist Vinay Prasad and health researcher Alyson Haslam provide a comprehensive after-the-fact assessment of the federal government’s rollout of the COVID-19 vaccines.

Their basic takeaway is that the vaccines were a “scientific success”tarnished by flawed federal vaccine policy.

The two argue the tremendous benefits of the COVID-19 vaccines for the elderly were undercut by government guidance and messaging that pushed vaccines on the young, healthy, and previously infected when data suggested that wasn’t worthwhile (and was in some cases counterproductive).

Worse still, the government even pushed vaccine mandates when it was increasingly clear the vaccines did not stop COVID-19 transmission, they argue.

To correct these errors for future pandemic responses, Prasad and Haslam recommend performing larger vaccine trials and collecting better data on vaccine performance in lower-risk populations. They also urge policy makers to be more willing to acknowledge the tradeoffs of vaccination.

That’s sound advice. We’ll have to wait and see if the government adopts it come the next pandemic.

There is one policy that they don’t mention and doesn’t totally depend on the government getting better at judging the risks of new vaccines: Charge people for them.

Had the government not provided COVID-19 vaccines for free and shielded vaccine makers and administrators from any liability for adverse reactions, prices could have better rationed vaccine supply and better informed people about their risks and benefits.

Without prices, people were instead left with flawed government recommendations, incentives, and rationing schemes.

Those who recall early 2021 will remember the complex, often transparently silly eligibility criteria state governments set up to ration scarce vaccine supplies. This often involved prioritizing younger, healthier, often politically connected “essential workers” over elderly people.

Prasad and Haslam criticize this as a government failure to prioritize groups at most risk of dying from COVID-19.

“While the UK prioritized nursing home residents and older individuals…the US included essential workers, including young, resident physicians,” write Prasad and Haslam. “Health care workers face higher risks of acquiring the virus due to occupation (though this was and is offset by available personal protective equipment), but this was less than the elevated risk of death faced by older individuals.”

Yet if the government hadn’t assigned itself the role of distributing vaccines for free, it wouldn’t have been forced into this position of rationing scarce vaccine supplies.

Demand for the vaccine is a function of the vaccine’s price. Since the vaccine’s price was $0, people who stood to gain comparatively less from vaccination and people for whom a vaccine would be lifesaving were equally incentivized to receive it.

Consequently, everyone rushed to get in line at the same time. The government then had to decide who got it first and predictably made flawed decisions.

Had vaccine makers been left to sell their product on an open market (instead of selling doses in bulk to the federal government to distribute for free), the elderly and those most at risk of COVID-19 would have been able to outbid people who could afford to wait longer. Perhaps more lives could have been saved.

Over the course of 2021, the supply of vaccines outgrew demand.

At the same time, as Prasad and Haslam recount, an increasing number of people (particularly young men) were developing myocarditis as a result of vaccination. Nevertheless, the government downplayed this risk, continued to urge younger populations to get vaccinated, and failed to collect data about the potential risks of vaccination.

That’s all a failure of the government policy. Even if the government was slow to adjust its recommendations, prices could have played a constructive role in informing people about their own risk-reward tradeoff of getting vaccinated.

If a 20-year-old man who’d already had COVID-19 had to spend something to get vaccinated, instead of nothing, fewer would have. Prasad and Haslam argue that would have been the right call healthwise.

Without prices, that hypothetical 20-year-old’s decision was informed mostly by government guidance, and, later, government mandates.

The government compounded this lack of prices by giving liability shields to vaccine makers. As it stands right now, no one is able to sue the maker of a COVID-19 vaccine should they have an adverse reaction. (Unlike standard, non-COVID vaccines, people are also not allowed to sue the government for compensation for the vaccine injuries.)

If pharmaceutical companies had to charge individual consumers to make money off their vaccines, and if those prices had to reflect the liability risks of the side effects some number of people would inevitably have, consumers would have been even better informed about the risks and rewards of vaccination.

One might counter that individual consumers aren’t in a position to perform this risk-reward calculation on their own.

That ignores the ways that other intermediaries in a better position to evaluate the costs and benefits of vaccination could contribute to the price signals individuals would use to make their own decisions.

One could imagine an insurance company declining to cover COVID-19 vaccines for the aforementioned healthy 20-year-old while subsidizing their elderly customers to get the shot. (This is, of course, illegal right now. The Affordable Care Act requiresmost insurance plansto cover the costs of vaccination for everyone.)

Instead, the financial incentives that were attached to vaccination were another part of the federally subsidized vaccination campaign.

State Medicaid programs paid providers bonuses for the number of patients they vaccinated (regardless of how at risk of COVID-19 those patients were). State governments gave out gift cardsto those who got vaccinated and entered them in lotteries to win even bigger prizes.

Leaving it up to private companies to produce and charge for vaccines would have one added benefit: It would make it much more difficult for the government to mandate vaccines or otherwise coerce people into getting them.

One of the things that made it easy for local and state governments to bar the unvaccinated from restaurants and schools was that they also had a lot of free, federally subsidized doses to give away. People didn’t have a real “excuse” not to get a shot.

Had people been required to pay for vaccines, it would have been more awkward and much harder (politically and practically) to mandate that they do so.

Economist Alex Tabarrok likes to say that a “price is a signal wrapped up in an incentive.” They signal crucial information and then incentivize people to act on that information in a rational, efficient way.

By divorcing COVID-19 vaccines from real price signals, we were left with an earnest, government-led vaccination effort. That effort got a lot of lifesaving vaccines to a lot of people.

But it also encouraged and subsidized people to get vaccinated when it was probably not a necessary or even good idea. When not enough people got vaccinated, governments turned to coercive mandates.

UK

VE Day: Veterans to join King for tea party as Keir Starmer praises ‘selfless dedication’

Published

2 hours ago

May 5, 2025

admin

VE Day: Veterans to join King for tea party as Keir Starmer praises 'selfless dedication'

Veterans are set to join the King for a VE Day tea party today as the prime minister has paid tribute to the “selfless dedication” of the war generation.

Among them will be a 99-year-old who took part in the D-Day landings and a 100-year-old woman who worked in the Special Operations Executive, known as Churchill’s Secret Army.

Director general of the Royal British Legion, Mark Atkinson, said the charity was “proud” to be taking a place “at the heart of these national celebrations and commemorations” on the 80th anniversary of the end of the Second World War.

He said it would be “one of our last opportunities as a nation to pay tribute to those veterans still with us today”.

Evacuees from World War Two and veterans who were still in active conflict after VE Day are among the other guests set to attend the tea party, which will take place in the presence of the King and other members of the Royal Family.

At 12pm, the Royal Family will observe a military procession, followed by a flypast.

It will be the first major VE Day anniversary without any of the royals who stood on the balcony of Buckingham Palace on the day victory in Europe was declared, after the death of the late Queen Elizabeth II in 2022.

‘Not just for Britain’

The celebrations come as Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer praised veterans for their “selfless dedication” and thanked them for a “debt that can never fully be repaid” in an open letter ahead of VE Day.

He said the stories which will be heard this week from those who fought in the Second World War would be a reminder that the victory “was not just for Britain” but was also “a victory for good against the assembled forces of hatred, tyranny and evil”.

Sir Keir said the WW2 veterans “represent the best of who we are” and that without their service “the freedom, peace and joy that these celebrations embody, would not be possible”.

Personnel from NATO allies the US, France and Germany will be among those taking part in the procession in London.

The commemorations will begin with the words of Sir Winston Churchill‘s 1945 victory speech, spoken by actor Timothy Spall.

Thousands of people are expected to line the streets of the capital to witness the celebrations.

On the anniversary itself on Thursday, marking exactly 80 years since the Allies formally accepted Germany’s surrender, a service of commemoration will be held at Westminster Abbey, to include a national two minutes’ silence.

Pubs across England and Wales, which usually close at 11pm, will also stay open for an extra two hours to allow punters more time to celebrate.

Sports

Logano gets 1st win this season in OT at Texas

Published

2 hours ago

May 5, 2025

admin

Logano gets 1st win this season in OT at Texas

Associated Press

May 4, 2025, 09:23 PM ET

FORT WORTH, Texas — Reigning NASCAR Cup champion Joey Logano overcame a lot to get his first victory this season.

It came a week after Team Penske teammate Austin Cindric‘s win at Talladega, where Logano had a fifth-place finish that became 39th after a postrace inspection found an issue with the spoiler on his No. 22 Ford. There was also Logano’s expletive-laden rant on the radio toward his teammate in the middle of that race that the two smoothed out during the week. Oh, and he started 27th at Texas after a bad qualifying effort on the 1½-mile track.

But Logano surged ahead on the restart in overtime Sunday to win in the 11th race this year. He led only seven of the 271 laps, four more than scheduled.

“After what happened last week, to be able to rebound and come right back, it’s a total ’22’ way of doing things. So proud of the team,” Logano said.

On the final restart after the 12th caution, Logano was on the inside of his other teammate, Ryan Blaney. But Logano pulled away on the backstretch and stayed easily in front for the final 1½ laps, while Ross Chastain then passed Blaney to finish second ahead of him.

“Just slowly, methodically,” Logano said of his progression to the front. “Just kept grinding, a couple here and a couple there and eventually get a win here.”

Logano got his 37th career victory, getting the lead for the first time on Lap 264. He went low to complete a pass of Michael McDowell.

“I mean, there’s always a story next week, right?” Logano said. “So I told my wife last week before we left, I said, ‘Watch me go win this one.’ It’s just how we do stuff.”

On a caution with 47 laps left, McDowell took only two tires and moved up 15 spots to second. He ended up leading 19 laps, but got loose a few laps after getting passed by Logano and crashed to bring out the caution that sent the race to overtime. He finished 26th.

“We were giving it everything we had there to try to keep track position,” McDowell said. “Joey got a run there, and I tried to block it. I went as far as I think you could probably go. When Blaney slid in front of me, it just took the air off of it and I just lost the back of it. I still had the fight in me, but I probably should have conceded at that point.”

Odds and Ends

William Byron, Kyle Larson, Denny Hamlin and Chase Elliott remained the top four in season points. … Elliott left Texas last spring with his first victory after 42 races and 18 months without one. He hasn’t won since, and now has another long winless drought — this one 38 races and nearly 13 months after finishing 16th. … A crew member for Christopher Bell crawled in through the passenger side of the No. 20 Joe Gibbs Racing Toyota and was fully in the car to reconnect an air hose to the driver’s helmet during a caution in the second stage. It took two stops during that caution, and twice climbing into the car, to resolve the issue.

Fiery end to Hamlin streak

Hamlin had finished on the lead lap in 21 consecutive races, but a fiery finish on Lap 75 ended that streak that had matched the eighth longest in NASCAR history. He was the first car out of the race.

After the No. 11 Joe Gibbs Racing Toyota lost power, something blew up when Hamlin recycled the engine. Flames were coming from under the car and it was engulfed in smoke when it rolled to a stop on the inside of the track, and Hamlin climbed out unharmed.

Youngest pole sitter

Carson Hocevar, the 22-year-old driver who is McDowell’s teammate with Spire Motorsports, was the youngest pole sitter in Texas. He led only the first 22 laps of the race, losing it while pitting during the first caution. He finished 24th after a late accident.

Stage cautions

Both in-race stages finished under caution. Cindric won Stage 1 after Hamlin’s issues, and Kyle Larson took the second after a yellow flag came out because of debris on the track after the right rear tire on Chris Buescher‘s car came apart.

Larson got his 68th overall stage win and his sixth at Texas, with both marks being records. He has won a stage in each of the past five Cup races at Texas, starting in his 2021 win there.

US

Trump calls for reopening of Alcatraz to house ‘most ruthless and violent offenders’

Published

4 hours ago

May 5, 2025

admin

Trump calls for reopening of Alcatraz to house 'most ruthless and violent offenders'

US President Donald Trump has called for the reopening of notorious prison Alcatraz.

In a post on his social media site Truth Social, Mr Trump said America had been “plagued by vicious, violent, and repeat criminal offenders”.

He added that when the United States was “a more serious nation” it “did not hesitate to lock up the most dangerous criminals”.

“That is why, today, I am directing the Bureau of Prisons, together with the Department of Justice, FBI, and Homeland Security, to reopen a substantially enlarged and rebuilt Alcatraz, to house America’s most ruthless and violent offenders,” he wrote.

Mr Trump said the reopening of the San Francisco prison would “serve as a symbol of law, order, and justice”.

The US president’s latest policy announcement comes after he fired national security adviser Mike Waltz last week in the first major change to his administration.

Alcatraz was infamously inescapable and in the 29 years it was open, 36 men attempted 14 separate escapes, according to the FBI.

Nearly all of them were caught or did not survive the attempt at escaping.

The prison housed some of America’s most notorious criminals, including Al Capone and George Kelly.

It has also been the subject of a number of films, including The Rock, starring Sean Connery and Nicolas Cage.

Alcatraz Island, which is surrounded by strong ocean currents and cold Pacific waters, is now a major tourist site, operated by the National Park Service.

The prison’s closure in 1963 was attributed to crumbling infrastructure and high repair costs.

A spokesperson for the Bureau of Prisons said it would “comply with all presidential orders”.

The Bureau of Prisons currently has 16 high-security prisons, including its maximum-security facility in Florence, Colorado, and a facility in Terre Haute, Indiana, which is home to the federal death chamber.

The United States’ federal law enforcement agency has been the subject of increased scrutiny in recent years after Jeffrey Epstein‘s suicide at a federal jail in New York City in 2019.