No. You don't get to weasel your way out of defending your central argument. You said:
IIRC, the reason was that it wouldn't bring covid vaccines to poor countries in a timely fashion, which would likely result in delays and more death. Pragmatic.
Defending patent exclusivity will bring covid vaccines to poor countries in a timely fashion. This will save lives. Very pragmatic. You said that.
So, why are first dose vaccination rates in poorer countries still less than half of the full vaccination rate in wealthy nations? It's because no timely vaccine deployment occurred. Delays and death were not prevented. Gates' supposed magnanimous goal failed spectacularly by any reasonable measure. The only thing he protected was billions in profits at the expense of human lives.
You also don't understand what a patent waiver even means:
You are still assuming that some third party/parties could/would magic a cheap effective vaccine clone into existence at the time it was most needed and most profitable to do otherwise.
A patent doesn't mean, "Sorry folks! We cured this disease, so nobody else can make their own cure! Too bad, so sad!" It means they've published how to make something, but can legally bar anybody from reproducing their work. It's an instruction manual you aren't allowed to follow, to protect their profits. A patent waiver removes that restriction.
If you do understand that, and are instead arguing that the global South is just too stupid to be able to follow instructions, well... then we fundamentally disagree on the foundations of ethics and humanity, and I don't want to ever speak with you again.
I understand the patent system very well, albeit in another context. I support much shorter/stricter criteria for patents in general, as well as waivers where it makes sense.
The argument is that nobody (no person, no company, nor government) would have mass produced or distributed cloned/copied covid vaccines to these areas faster at that point in time (even if approval processes were largely waived).
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/23/health/covid-africa-deaths.html discusses some of the complexities in Africa, if you are interested. I agree that the response could have been better, but it could also have been worse. Other places had their own issues.
I don't think the current vaccination % means much, given that most people on the planet have been exposed to it, often multiple times.
Why would anyone who gets a mild case every few months bother to vaccinate? There are reasons, but not many that resonate.
No. You don't get to weasel your way out of defending your central argument. You said:
Defending patent exclusivity will bring covid vaccines to poor countries in a timely fashion. This will save lives. Very pragmatic. You said that.
So, why are first dose vaccination rates in poorer countries still less than half of the full vaccination rate in wealthy nations? It's because no timely vaccine deployment occurred. Delays and death were not prevented. Gates' supposed magnanimous goal failed spectacularly by any reasonable measure. The only thing he protected was billions in profits at the expense of human lives.
You also don't understand what a patent waiver even means:
A patent doesn't mean, "Sorry folks! We cured this disease, so nobody else can make their own cure! Too bad, so sad!" It means they've published how to make something, but can legally bar anybody from reproducing their work. It's an instruction manual you aren't allowed to follow, to protect their profits. A patent waiver removes that restriction.
If you do understand that, and are instead arguing that the global South is just too stupid to be able to follow instructions, well... then we fundamentally disagree on the foundations of ethics and humanity, and I don't want to ever speak with you again.
I understand the patent system very well, albeit in another context. I support much shorter/stricter criteria for patents in general, as well as waivers where it makes sense.
The argument is that nobody (no person, no company, nor government) would have mass produced or distributed cloned/copied covid vaccines to these areas faster at that point in time (even if approval processes were largely waived).
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/23/health/covid-africa-deaths.html discusses some of the complexities in Africa, if you are interested. I agree that the response could have been better, but it could also have been worse. Other places had their own issues.
I don't think the current vaccination % means much, given that most people on the planet have been exposed to it, often multiple times.
Why would anyone who gets a mild case every few months bother to vaccinate? There are reasons, but not many that resonate.