Vaccine nationalism and storage are continuing to exacerbate the COVID-19 pandemic by endangering global plans for equitable and efficient COVID-19 vaccine delivery. Both instances reflect the existing limitations of global health governance, and even the wealthiest countries are baffled as to why immunization provides the greatest benefit to the globe.

Is COVAX To Blame For Failing To Close Global Vaccination Disparities?
Is COVAX To Blame For Failing To Close Global Vaccination Disparities?


New COVID drugs face delays as trials grow more difficult.


Necessary But Not Sufficient.


There is a considerable disparity in the proportion of people immunized with COVID-19 between low- and high-income nations. More than 80% of the population of high-income countries had been vaccinated as of early 2022, but fewer than 10% of the population of low-income countries had been vaccinated. This disparity in immunological status reflects disparities in vaccine access.


COVID-19 Vaccinations Global Access (COVAX), Gavi, Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI), and the World Health Organization are some of the measures in place to prevent uneven access to vaccines around the world (CEPI). It was a WHO-led multinational vaccine delivery mechanism). COVAX was established to provide access to the COVID-19 vaccine to individuals all over the world, as well as to serve as a conduit for government and critical stakeholders To control a pandemic, all parties must cooperate together.

COVAX helps 92 low- and middle-income nations purchase COVID-19 vaccines, as well as more than 97 high- and middle-income countries. This level of ambition and scope was unprecedented in the field of global health. COVAX had provided over a billion vaccines to 148 countries by early 2022, predominantly low- and middle-income countries, suggesting that high- and middle-income countries' participation was more talk than reality. increase.


So, if one of COVAX's key aims was to prevent severe inequalities in worldwide vaccination rates, what is the source of the current gaps? And, despite the delivery of over a billion vaccinations in 148 countries, the majority of which are low- and middle-income countries, COVAX is extremely dissatisfied?


COVAX, its distribution system, communication with governments and the general public, and governance have all been criticized by a number of policymakers, lawmakers, and fans. Many people believe that the COVAX aim was foolish and unrealistic because it did not include money and vaccine supply. There is also a belief that COVAX does not stress the waiver of intellectual property rights and that the pharmaceutical company's contract is not transparent.

However, the rise in nationalism and vaccine stockpiling over the last year and a half is indicative of a larger issue than COVAX. When the government forms an arrangement with a pharmaceutical business to preserve and enhance its vaccination supplies, nationalism and vaccine hoarding emerge. The goal is to stockpile vaccines and vaccinate the country as quickly as possible, regardless of the distribution constraints that this may impose on other regions of the world.


We feel that the process and attempts to distribute COVAX fairly have been harmed by this worldwide protected trade principle. If the COVAX designer bears any responsibility, it is excessive to the rich's sympathy with the poor in the epidemic, even if such solidarity benefits the rich's citizens. Is something you can rely on. His detractors are somewhat accurate in this sense. Developed nations clearly overestimated CEPI, WHO, Gavi, and their leadership. They had overestimated the amount of money, logistical assistance, and readiness to queue. Furthermore, many COVAX detractors undervalue or dismiss their very important contribution to global vaccination, even if it is not a robust or unbiased method.


One of us, Yoo, and a colleague assessed the fairness of vaccine allocation and distribution to 148 nations and territories participating in COVAX for COVID-19. Despite the issues, COVAX is an important source of information to address worldwide discrepancies in the allocation and distribution of COVID-19 vaccinations, according to a new study published in the World Health Organization bulletin. There is, as I discovered. In terms of the number of vaccinations obtained via COVAX, we discovered that countries and areas with a low per capita gross domestic product (GDP) benefit more than high-income countries. When the population of nations above the age of 65 was taken into account, the advantage was enhanced even further.


To put it another way, COVAX was required, but not sufficient, to vaccinate the whole planet. The failure is a failure of the global health paradigm, which has long depended on charity instead of solidarity and emphasizes responsiveness rather than resilience. COVAX alone would not have been able to offer the resources and processes to ensure an equitable global distribution of the COVID-19 vaccine. HIV/AIDS, malaria, TB, polio, and even smallpox have never had such a broad target or been eradicated with such speed in global health. The only sickness that has ever been successfully eliminated in the world.


Looking Ahead.


So, what can we do differently next time? We feel that the actual answer to uneven vaccination availability lies outside of COVAX's existing position and commitment to COVID-19 and other public health issues. Leaders in high-income, middle-income, and low-income countries must think large. Nations, particularly high-income countries, must also adhere to existing WHO International Health Regulations requirements, including the mandatory government pledge to "promise mutual cooperation."


The main reason for these disparities is that many high-income nations regard valuable medical technology as a limited resource that must be stored. Instead, people should regard them not just as global public goods, but also as something that is in their own best interests. The global loss of life and economic output over the previous two years should be enough to prove this point. The same is true if the virus has a higher proclivity for producing mutants, and those mutants fully disregard the boundary.
What does such a perception look like in reality?
To begin, high-income nations must join COVAX without having to sign an exclusive deal to acquire the vaccine.


Second, high-income individuals must commit to paying COVAX for a three-year (or longer) period, comparable to the World Bank's World Fund and the International Development Association's recovery model. This is an imperfect model, but it is understood by one of the contributing countries.
Third, nations are assisting in the transfer of intellectual property rights and related technology to certified vaccine makers in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), as well as vaccination doses for LMIC persons living near their homes. It must be possible to make in.


Some of these suggestions do not represent an entire list of legislative and structural reforms required to avoid a future pandemic from causing the same inequity and injustice as the current one. In the years preceding the pandemic, it is obvious that policies and choices from COVAX, WHO, and many other institutions that make up the global public health and preparation system did not perform as intended. is. Fortunately, I now know how to improve my performance in the future. We have the resources to promote equality, justice, and global solidarity. And we must do it for the sake of people's lives and livelihoods all throughout the planet.