undefined | Better HN

0 pointsunmole4y ago0 comments

> My wife and I are under 40 and we got the vaccine for free at a government health centre.

Like I said, the government reversed its stance after the Supreme Court intervened[0].

> Then some states like Delhi and Maharashtra asked to be allowed to procure vaccines on their own.

Some rich states tried to procure vaccines on their own. How does that preclude the Union from extending vaccine coverage to all? And the second link is dated May 8th. The so called Liberalised Pricing and Accelerated National Covid-19 Vaccination Strategy was announced in April and came into effect from May 1st[1]. And I find the notion of the policy being shaped by the demands from opposition ruled states to be farfetched.

> This was in the early days when the vaccine supply was less.

Why was the supply less? Could it be because in its infinite wisdom, the government did not place orders with SII until January 2021? And then placed an order for a grand total of 11 million doses when SII had already stockpiled 50 million doses[2][3]?

0: https://theprint.in/india/sc-orders-review-of-modi-govts-vac...

1: https://www.narendramodi.in/government-of-india-announces-a-...

2: https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/can-deliver-vaccin...

0 comments

hiyer4y ago

> Some rich states tried to procure vaccines on their own.

My point was that the states themselves asked to be allowed to procure the vaccines, so blaming the Union for asking them to "compete" is incorrect. As your link to the Liberalized policy states, 50% of the supply was being purchased by the Union, presumably to supply to the "poor" states.

> How does that preclude the Union from extending vaccine coverage to all?

You're right - it doesn't. However I think the (only) Rs. 35000 crore budget should have made it clear that the government was not planning to inoculate everyone for free. Some, like me, got lucky; but I know plenty of people who had to pay for their vaccines.

> And then placed an order for a grand total of 11 million doses

From Jan 16-Feb 28, India was inoculating only frontline workers and healthcare staff. For these AFAICT, the Union ordered 11 million vaccines in Jan[1], as you mentioned, and 14.5 million in Feb[2].

India started inoculating senior citizens and people with co-morbidities from March 1, and in March the Union had ordered 120 million vaccines[3].

The Union claimed, in May, that they were purchasing the entire supply of both SII and Bharat Biologicals, so if there was any shortage it was due to the lack of manufacturing and not lack of purchase. I'm not blaming the manufacturers of course - obviously they took time to scale, and they (especially SII) have done well now.

1. https://www.indiatoday.in/coronavirus-outbreak/story/india-o...

2. https://www.business-standard.com/article/current-affairs/go...

3. https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/120mn-doses-ordere...

Edit: added some more information on vaccine orders

unmoleOP4y ago

> As your link to the Liberalized policy states, 50% of the supply was being purchased by the Union, presumably to supply to the "poor" states.

No, that was meant for those above 45. At no point before the reversal did the Union government supply vaccines to states for vaccinating those under 45.

> I think the (only) Rs. 35000 crore budget should have made it clear that the government was not planning to inoculate everyone for free.

Government procures Covishield at Rs. 205 a dose. The adult population in India is about 100 crores. The budget is enough to cover the majority. Like the Supreme Court observed, the decision to exclude those under 45 was arbitrary and irrational.

> From Jan 16-Feb 28, India was inoculating only frontline workers and healthcare staff. For these AFAICT, the Union ordered 11 million vaccines in Jan[1], as you mentioned, and 14.5 million in Feb[2].

Again, SII was sitting on 50 million doses in January. Why did the government not procure them? Why did the government resort to piece-meal purchase orders? The US on the contrary ordered 300 million vaccines at once. This gave the manufacturers enough working capital to scale up production. SII did not get 3000 crore advance for the government till end of April. The shortage could have been mitigated if the government had done that in January.

hiyer4y ago

> The budget is enough to cover the majority

Majority, yes, but not all.

> Like the Supreme Court observed, the decision to exclude those under 45 was arbitrary and irrational.

I don't disagree there.

> Again, SII was sitting on 50 million doses in January. Why did the government not procure them? Why did the government resort to piece-meal purchase orders?

Actually the govt did commit to buy 60 million, as the link I shared mentioned. As to why it did not buy outright, I'd guess it's because it didn't need them when only FLWs were being inoculated. Maybe the storage and transportation infrastructure was also not in place, but I'm just speculating here.

Edit: another reason (which I just read in an article) to order piecemeal, was apparently to keep options for other vaccines open as and when they became available. At the time there were quite a few possibilities - Pfizer, Moderna and Novavax IIRC. In hindsight this was suboptimal as Pfizer and Moderna had committed their supply elsewhere and Novavax was not completed in time.

> The US on the contrary ordered 300 million vaccines at once

Did they also pay in advance for all 300 million?

> SII did not get 3000 crore advance for the government till end of April.

SII asked for that amount only in the beginning of April[1], so that's not that much of a delay.

1. https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/outstretched-sii-c...

unmoleOP4y ago

> Majority, yes, but not all.

But including those under 45.

> Edit: another reason (which I just read in an article) to order piecemeal, was apparently to keep options for other vaccines open as and when they became available. At the time there were quite a few possibilities - Pfizer, Moderna and Novavax IIRC. In hindsight this was suboptimal as Pfizer and Moderna had committed their supply elsewhere and Novavax was not completed in time.

Moderna was not granted approval in India till June and Pfizer which was the first vaccine to apply was never approved. This is wholly unconvincing and sounds like post-facto justification.

> Did they also pay in advance for all 300 million?

Yes. Not to mention the 11 billion USD that was granted to 8 companies for development.

> SII asked for that amount only in the beginning of April[1], so that's not that much of a delay.

The government did order upfront so, there was no way for SII to figure out what the demand would be. Until April, SII was exporting vaccines for considerably more than what the government was paying. The ban on vaccine exports cut of that source.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

hiyer4y ago

> Some rich states tried to procure vaccines on their own.

> How does that preclude the Union from extending vaccine coverage to all?

> And then placed an order for a grand total of 11 million doses

From Jan 16-Feb 28, India was inoculating only frontline workers and healthcare staff. For these AFAICT, the Union ordered 11 million vaccines in Jan[1], as you mentioned, and 14.5 million in Feb[2].

India started inoculating senior citizens and people with co-morbidities from March 1, and in March the Union had ordered 120 million vaccines[3].

1. https://www.indiatoday.in/coronavirus-outbreak/story/india-o...

2. https://www.business-standard.com/article/current-affairs/go...

3. https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/120mn-doses-ordere...

Edit: added some more information on vaccine orders

unmoleOP4y ago

> As your link to the Liberalized policy states, 50% of the supply was being purchased by the Union, presumably to supply to the "poor" states.

No, that was meant for those above 45. At no point before the reversal did the Union government supply vaccines to states for vaccinating those under 45.

> I think the (only) Rs. 35000 crore budget should have made it clear that the government was not planning to inoculate everyone for free.

hiyer4y ago

> The budget is enough to cover the majority

Majority, yes, but not all.

> Like the Supreme Court observed, the decision to exclude those under 45 was arbitrary and irrational.

I don't disagree there.

> Again, SII was sitting on 50 million doses in January. Why did the government not procure them? Why did the government resort to piece-meal purchase orders?

> The US on the contrary ordered 300 million vaccines at once

Did they also pay in advance for all 300 million?

> SII did not get 3000 crore advance for the government till end of April.

SII asked for that amount only in the beginning of April[1], so that's not that much of a delay.

1. https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/outstretched-sii-c...

unmoleOP4y ago

> Majority, yes, but not all.

But including those under 45.

Moderna was not granted approval in India till June and Pfizer which was the first vaccine to apply was never approved. This is wholly unconvincing and sounds like post-facto justification.

> Did they also pay in advance for all 300 million?

Yes. Not to mention the 11 billion USD that was granted to 8 companies for development.

> SII asked for that amount only in the beginning of April[1], so that's not that much of a delay.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse