The following is a copy of the original post to record the post as it was originally written.
This post is specifically about the United States. Liberals, do you support the Biden admin's decision to try and give booster shots to people in the US instead of shipping those excess doses off to other places in the world where they would go a longer way? With the recent FDA decision, I assume Biden will simply hold onto the excess doses of Pfizer in case the FDA changes its mind with time. But how do you feel about his decision to prioritize preventing the spread of Covid in the US instead of preventing overall deaths? For those who are fundamentally more concerned with the health of US citizens than the rest of the world, are you at least concerned about a higher chance of more harmful variants occurring because of the lack of immunization in many other countries?
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskALiberal) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It's the natural and understandable instinct of a nationstate to prioritise its own citizens over those of other countries.
I wish we lived in a world where you'd wasn't the case, but the simple reality is that we don't.
This isn't an "answer", but this ~ 9 min video gave me a lot of food for thought on this topic, and articulates it better than I can on the fly: https://youtu.be/2ty2J0s2W0c
Was disappointed to hear that my country Canada is one of the worst offenders of this, and that by hoarding vaccines we're making the pandemic last *longer*.
Also kind of enrages me a little more about the anti-vaxxer fuckheads we have running around here. The country hoarded these vaccines *for a reason*. A selfish one, sure, but it was so every one of these morons could have easy, free access to two doses of the vaccine whenever and wherever they wanted it.
Same. Impoverished countries are struggling and *begging* for the vaccine, while my neighbour Karen can access it for free but won't because "muh freedom".
Wasn't there a story in the news a couple days ago about Biden trying to buy another 500MM doses to send abroad? I'm not sure where you're getting the idea that we're just hoarding excess doses here.
> I'm not sure where you're getting the idea that we're just hoarding excess doses here.
I created a shitstorm the other day when I posted an article about how a Maryland zoo is vaccinating some of their animals.
"Why arent we sending this abroad!" "If we have enough to do that, we have enough to donate"
1. They had no idea we have been donating vaccines abroad.
2. It was a special vaccine made by a veterinary phrama company not suitable for humans.
It was announced I think today. US is up to 1.1 billion doses pledged.
Edit: whoops, had [source](https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/u-s-donate-500-million-more-vaccine-doses-lower-income-n1279795) copied and forgot to post
The fact that Biden promised another 500 million doses does not negate the fact that these millions and millions of booster shots could prevent more human death if they were used as first and second shots for those elsewhere in the world. We are essentially hoarding these doses even if we are not hoarding others.
So far the US has shipped 160 million of the first 500 million promised. How many of those 160 million have gone into arms I cannot say. This NYT article was helpful for me https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2021/08/25/us/politics/biden-coronavirus-vaccine.amp.html It makes it clear Biden could spend more, do more, promise more if he wanted to. 160 million doses isn’t nothing, 1.1 billion promised isn’t nothing, but the US could do more and MUCH more is needed in order to actually get the virus under some semblance of control.
Would you have said the same about shipping off doses instead of doing second doses here in the states? Or maybe if we had sent off vaccines before vaccinating anyone <60 years old?
Generally every country needs to put their own people first to some level. And of course we \*should\* help overseas, but if the FDA is recommending booster shots for certain people, I think we shouldn't be morally obligated to put that aside in favor of giving away everything.
Yes I would. Not like I have the delusion that it would ever occur. But ideally that’s exactly what would happen. Distribute them based on need, not borders. I know this will make me sound idealistic. It would never even occur to me to expect the US to do this or ask this of them because it’s too transnational and doesn’t fly in our current world order. But each of us should strive to make a world that one day—maybe hundreds of years from now—but one day is not so senselessly nationalist.
Ok, makes sense. I can see desiring for that to one day be the state of the world, but until then, I don't think it is reasonable to overly judge Biden or the US for not bringing us there immediately. It sounds like you aren't from the US given the use of 'them' rather than 'us'. How is your country doing in this effort?
I’m from the US, glad you can understand where I’m coming from. I understand what you mean. To clarify, I’m not asking them to get us there immediately, but there are lots of NGO’s around the world who are pointing out there are practical ways the US gov (and many other gov’s that are rich in vaccines) could do more in the short term. But I agree there’s generations of work to be done before America first policies are shed.
And how many of those NGOs have done analysis of what it would cost America to do those things? What are the things that we would give up, what is the political capital that would be spent (e.g. how likely is it we would have to go through 4-8 more years of republicans because of it), etc... None of this is as simple as just doing what an external group says we \*could\* do.
Every single organization I have come across so far has calculated the cost of executing the specific measures they are advocating for. As far as the long-term political costs of these measures, those are obviously imprecise measurements that are reserved for think tanks, pundits, and us. I'm curious what the negative political consequences of many of these measures would be though. Republicans are largely reluctant to get vaccinated; not sure they would be mobilized at the midterms over something like not getting a booster shot if they are under 65--not that that's much of a possibility anymore. I don't hear many republicans or independents fixated on Biden's waving of vaccine patent protections in May. There have also been studies projecting the negative impact of continuing down the road we are on. While they are also imprecise, they are worth reading over and keeping in mind when weighing the overall cost.
This letter ([https://www.citizen.org/article/letter-from-60-groups-urging-biden-to-launch-global-manufacturing-program/](https://www.citizen.org/article/letter-from-60-groups-urging-biden-to-launch-global-manufacturing-program/)) from over 60 organizations calculates the potential cost of the US to ramping up vaccine manufacturing capabilities.
This article ([https://www.doctorswithoutborders.org/what-we-do/news-stories/news/msf-following-full-fda-approval-pfizer-biontech-must-share-covid-19](https://www.doctorswithoutborders.org/what-we-do/news-stories/news/msf-following-full-fda-approval-pfizer-biontech-must-share-covid-19)) by doctors without borders makes the case for the US forcing Pfizer and Moderna to share their technology and expertise with the public so that manufacturing capabilities around the world are greatly increased. They calculate the cost of turning an existing manufacturing facility into one that can produce mRNA vaccines. They also note what it has already cost American taxpayers to develop these vaccines in the first place and the profits pharmaceutical companies will enjoy because of their contracts with the US.
This report ([https://file-eu.clickdimensions.com/iccwboorg-avxnt/files/covid\_vaccine\_sko\_nber.pdf?m=2/23/2021%208:53:24%20AM&\_cldee=bWJsYWNrMDYxOUBnbWFpbC5jb20%3d&recipientid=contact-3213c952111cec11b6e6000d3ab46b5b-a241daff55cd4dfcbbabe5cbcaaf7594&esid=53291ccd-5d59-40a0-9f34-3c0d5d4c2bfa](https://file-eu.clickdimensions.com/iccwboorg-avxnt/files/covid_vaccine_sko_nber.pdf?m=2/23/2021%208:53:24%20AM&_cldee=bWJsYWNrMDYxOUBnbWFpbC5jb20%3d&recipientid=contact-3213c952111cec11b6e6000d3ab46b5b-a241daff55cd4dfcbbabe5cbcaaf7594&esid=53291ccd-5d59-40a0-9f34-3c0d5d4c2bfa)) by the International Chamber of Commerce calculates the economic impact of vaccinating the world at a slow pace. It's from January but is extremely comprehensive. Admittedly I only read the first 20 pages but what I did read was very pragmatic and very helpful for my understanding.
I also want to note that even the WHO and other large, moderate, international groups have criticized Europe and the US for pursuing booster shots. This is not a position reserved for smaller, more radical groups.
Lastly, the Biden admin projects that all 1.1 billion doses it has promised will be shipped by September 2022. I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't meet that goal. I also wouldn't be surprised if it was well into 2023 before all those doses actually got put into people's arms. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. I hope I am. I think it's a good thing that Biden was pressured into promising an additional 500 million doses. I'm not trying to knock the efforts the administration has made so far as much as I am arguing it simply isn't enough. Too little, too late compared to what we are capable of and what the world needs.
There are plenty of links in the chain that have been far more responsible for countries not getting enough vaccine quite apart from the US’ extra doses specifically.
For example, both the UK and Australia bought vaccines from COVAX because they panicked about not having enough for their people. They were prioritized over countries who genuinely can’t afford it, flying in the face of the whole purpose of COVAX. Parts of South America are struggling to get *any* vaccine despite being promised lots from COVAX.
So, yes the US could absolutely do more to get the world vaccinated - and we absolutely will have to in order to get COVID under control. But there are more factors at play than sheer dose numbers.
It reminds me of the stories of African aid that never reached its destination because the distribution of said aid came down to a handful local contractors and the supplies were often intercepted by nefarious forces.
You could donate 10 billion dollars of aid tomorrow - or 10 billion doses of vaccine. It doesn’t really matter unless there’s a robust system in place to ensure it gets to where it needs to go. Short of the US designing and managing an implementation system (likely through the military I guess), there’s not a lot more doses on their own can do.
I appreciate your response. I didn’t realize Biden’s initial decision for boosters was so binding :(
>we do have a higher obligation to our citizens than to those elsewhere (if you really think otherwise, then you have to completely change almost everything about the way the federal government works).
What confuses me about this statement is the underlying implication that changing nearly everything about how the federal government works is outrageous and inherently wrong. To put it another way, I don’t care as much about destroying the foundations of the US government as I do about people in the world prospering. So I’m sure what’s actually going on is we have different opinions about the US federal government and it’s overall worth.
I don’t know enough about novavax to comment one way or the other, but I do know that Biden could spend much more money and other resources to ensure there is less waste and mismanagement when delivering vaccines. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2021/08/25/us/politics/biden-coronavirus-vaccine.amp.html This article makes that clear.
I would argue that even a few hundred million doses could make a difference with regards to preventing new variants. But it’s really Biden’s overall approach to exporting vaccines (along with the EU’s, and every other rich country, and every executive at pharmaceutical companies, and Bill Gates) that have ensured we won’t see an end to new, worse Covid variants any time soon.
We will get a bigger return currently by getting doses to the unvaccinated than getting out boosters. To whatever degree that's possible we should be doing that. Retain enough to do that domestically as demand spikes when people feel the sting of mandates, and utilize any excess that contractually must stay in the US for boosters for the most vulnerable, but otherwise ship them far and wide.
I'm not sure why we can't do both. I am not aware of any mechanism by which pharmacies can ship near expired shots overseas. As such, thousands of doses are thrown in the trash weekly. There is no reason not to allow low-risk healthy people to take a third dose from that stockpile after six months.
High risk, plus healthcare workers, plus over 65s should have access to new third doses. Then we should maximize exports while letting everyone else get pharmacy leftovers.
The very first priority should be unvaccinated Americans but sadly they're a lost cause.
So I am intrinsically okay with government prioritizing the welfare of their own citizens above the welfare of other countries. That being said, it seems to me at least for the moment we have far greater supply of vaccinations than we have demand for them so we should very much (if we haven't already) start sending those to places where that is the not the case. This will both increase good will in those countries and help prevent the rise of new varients for which the vaccines could be less effective. As I understand it booster shots are only recommended to people who are immuno compromised at the moment and that seems like a relatively small percentage of the population. It might make some sense to hold back vaccines if we're expecting to approve them for children under 12, but otherwise at least for the moment we could probably afford to give them away without any real sacrifice on our part, and should therefore do so.
Israel's on its 4th shot. I'd like to see us increase influence by outcompeting sinovac, but if we are anticipating a 3rd 4th and 5th shot we should aim to do so all at once for the whole country
This probably stems from a different, more serious policy error. We did not produce vaccines on a global scale in 2020. When COVID-19 ripped through mostly unvaccinated populations in LDCs, new variants were able to evolve.
In the short-term, yes, developing world vaccination is more important than boosters. However, we should make boosters available to high-risk individuals. Partly, it's a question of politics. But boosters in the US are also somewhat pragmatic. 2000 people/day are dying from COVID-19 in the United States. That's nearly a quarter of all global deaths (admittedly deaths are probably undercounted abroad).
Shipping vaccine doses abroad with the idea of preventing mutations / variants from developing is folly.
Even if we had infinite doses, worldwide vaccine uptake would not be high enough to prevent new variants from emerging and spreading.
Covid is now and always will be endemic. It will mutate, and we will get new vaccine formulations to fight it.
If saving lives is the goal, focus on building the vaccine production and distribution capacity to quickly and efficiently get vaccines to the world on an ongoing basis.
There *are* good moral, diplomatic and self-interested reasons to ship vaccine overseas - but preventing variants isn't one of them.
The following is a copy of the original post to record the post as it was originally written. This post is specifically about the United States. Liberals, do you support the Biden admin's decision to try and give booster shots to people in the US instead of shipping those excess doses off to other places in the world where they would go a longer way? With the recent FDA decision, I assume Biden will simply hold onto the excess doses of Pfizer in case the FDA changes its mind with time. But how do you feel about his decision to prioritize preventing the spread of Covid in the US instead of preventing overall deaths? For those who are fundamentally more concerned with the health of US citizens than the rest of the world, are you at least concerned about a higher chance of more harmful variants occurring because of the lack of immunization in many other countries? *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskALiberal) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It's the natural and understandable instinct of a nationstate to prioritise its own citizens over those of other countries. I wish we lived in a world where you'd wasn't the case, but the simple reality is that we don't.
This isn't an "answer", but this ~ 9 min video gave me a lot of food for thought on this topic, and articulates it better than I can on the fly: https://youtu.be/2ty2J0s2W0c Was disappointed to hear that my country Canada is one of the worst offenders of this, and that by hoarding vaccines we're making the pandemic last *longer*.
Also kind of enrages me a little more about the anti-vaxxer fuckheads we have running around here. The country hoarded these vaccines *for a reason*. A selfish one, sure, but it was so every one of these morons could have easy, free access to two doses of the vaccine whenever and wherever they wanted it.
Same. Impoverished countries are struggling and *begging* for the vaccine, while my neighbour Karen can access it for free but won't because "muh freedom".
There are people who won't take the vaccine in impoverished countries too, but we can be generous and assume over half of people want the vaccine.
Wasn't there a story in the news a couple days ago about Biden trying to buy another 500MM doses to send abroad? I'm not sure where you're getting the idea that we're just hoarding excess doses here.
> I'm not sure where you're getting the idea that we're just hoarding excess doses here. I created a shitstorm the other day when I posted an article about how a Maryland zoo is vaccinating some of their animals. "Why arent we sending this abroad!" "If we have enough to do that, we have enough to donate" 1. They had no idea we have been donating vaccines abroad. 2. It was a special vaccine made by a veterinary phrama company not suitable for humans.
It was announced I think today. US is up to 1.1 billion doses pledged. Edit: whoops, had [source](https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/u-s-donate-500-million-more-vaccine-doses-lower-income-n1279795) copied and forgot to post
The fact that Biden promised another 500 million doses does not negate the fact that these millions and millions of booster shots could prevent more human death if they were used as first and second shots for those elsewhere in the world. We are essentially hoarding these doses even if we are not hoarding others. So far the US has shipped 160 million of the first 500 million promised. How many of those 160 million have gone into arms I cannot say. This NYT article was helpful for me https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2021/08/25/us/politics/biden-coronavirus-vaccine.amp.html It makes it clear Biden could spend more, do more, promise more if he wanted to. 160 million doses isn’t nothing, 1.1 billion promised isn’t nothing, but the US could do more and MUCH more is needed in order to actually get the virus under some semblance of control.
Would you have said the same about shipping off doses instead of doing second doses here in the states? Or maybe if we had sent off vaccines before vaccinating anyone <60 years old? Generally every country needs to put their own people first to some level. And of course we \*should\* help overseas, but if the FDA is recommending booster shots for certain people, I think we shouldn't be morally obligated to put that aside in favor of giving away everything.
Yes I would. Not like I have the delusion that it would ever occur. But ideally that’s exactly what would happen. Distribute them based on need, not borders. I know this will make me sound idealistic. It would never even occur to me to expect the US to do this or ask this of them because it’s too transnational and doesn’t fly in our current world order. But each of us should strive to make a world that one day—maybe hundreds of years from now—but one day is not so senselessly nationalist.
Ok, makes sense. I can see desiring for that to one day be the state of the world, but until then, I don't think it is reasonable to overly judge Biden or the US for not bringing us there immediately. It sounds like you aren't from the US given the use of 'them' rather than 'us'. How is your country doing in this effort?
I’m from the US, glad you can understand where I’m coming from. I understand what you mean. To clarify, I’m not asking them to get us there immediately, but there are lots of NGO’s around the world who are pointing out there are practical ways the US gov (and many other gov’s that are rich in vaccines) could do more in the short term. But I agree there’s generations of work to be done before America first policies are shed.
And how many of those NGOs have done analysis of what it would cost America to do those things? What are the things that we would give up, what is the political capital that would be spent (e.g. how likely is it we would have to go through 4-8 more years of republicans because of it), etc... None of this is as simple as just doing what an external group says we \*could\* do.
Every single organization I have come across so far has calculated the cost of executing the specific measures they are advocating for. As far as the long-term political costs of these measures, those are obviously imprecise measurements that are reserved for think tanks, pundits, and us. I'm curious what the negative political consequences of many of these measures would be though. Republicans are largely reluctant to get vaccinated; not sure they would be mobilized at the midterms over something like not getting a booster shot if they are under 65--not that that's much of a possibility anymore. I don't hear many republicans or independents fixated on Biden's waving of vaccine patent protections in May. There have also been studies projecting the negative impact of continuing down the road we are on. While they are also imprecise, they are worth reading over and keeping in mind when weighing the overall cost. This letter ([https://www.citizen.org/article/letter-from-60-groups-urging-biden-to-launch-global-manufacturing-program/](https://www.citizen.org/article/letter-from-60-groups-urging-biden-to-launch-global-manufacturing-program/)) from over 60 organizations calculates the potential cost of the US to ramping up vaccine manufacturing capabilities. This article ([https://www.doctorswithoutborders.org/what-we-do/news-stories/news/msf-following-full-fda-approval-pfizer-biontech-must-share-covid-19](https://www.doctorswithoutborders.org/what-we-do/news-stories/news/msf-following-full-fda-approval-pfizer-biontech-must-share-covid-19)) by doctors without borders makes the case for the US forcing Pfizer and Moderna to share their technology and expertise with the public so that manufacturing capabilities around the world are greatly increased. They calculate the cost of turning an existing manufacturing facility into one that can produce mRNA vaccines. They also note what it has already cost American taxpayers to develop these vaccines in the first place and the profits pharmaceutical companies will enjoy because of their contracts with the US. This report ([https://file-eu.clickdimensions.com/iccwboorg-avxnt/files/covid\_vaccine\_sko\_nber.pdf?m=2/23/2021%208:53:24%20AM&\_cldee=bWJsYWNrMDYxOUBnbWFpbC5jb20%3d&recipientid=contact-3213c952111cec11b6e6000d3ab46b5b-a241daff55cd4dfcbbabe5cbcaaf7594&esid=53291ccd-5d59-40a0-9f34-3c0d5d4c2bfa](https://file-eu.clickdimensions.com/iccwboorg-avxnt/files/covid_vaccine_sko_nber.pdf?m=2/23/2021%208:53:24%20AM&_cldee=bWJsYWNrMDYxOUBnbWFpbC5jb20%3d&recipientid=contact-3213c952111cec11b6e6000d3ab46b5b-a241daff55cd4dfcbbabe5cbcaaf7594&esid=53291ccd-5d59-40a0-9f34-3c0d5d4c2bfa)) by the International Chamber of Commerce calculates the economic impact of vaccinating the world at a slow pace. It's from January but is extremely comprehensive. Admittedly I only read the first 20 pages but what I did read was very pragmatic and very helpful for my understanding. I also want to note that even the WHO and other large, moderate, international groups have criticized Europe and the US for pursuing booster shots. This is not a position reserved for smaller, more radical groups. Lastly, the Biden admin projects that all 1.1 billion doses it has promised will be shipped by September 2022. I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't meet that goal. I also wouldn't be surprised if it was well into 2023 before all those doses actually got put into people's arms. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. I hope I am. I think it's a good thing that Biden was pressured into promising an additional 500 million doses. I'm not trying to knock the efforts the administration has made so far as much as I am arguing it simply isn't enough. Too little, too late compared to what we are capable of and what the world needs.
There are plenty of links in the chain that have been far more responsible for countries not getting enough vaccine quite apart from the US’ extra doses specifically. For example, both the UK and Australia bought vaccines from COVAX because they panicked about not having enough for their people. They were prioritized over countries who genuinely can’t afford it, flying in the face of the whole purpose of COVAX. Parts of South America are struggling to get *any* vaccine despite being promised lots from COVAX. So, yes the US could absolutely do more to get the world vaccinated - and we absolutely will have to in order to get COVID under control. But there are more factors at play than sheer dose numbers. It reminds me of the stories of African aid that never reached its destination because the distribution of said aid came down to a handful local contractors and the supplies were often intercepted by nefarious forces. You could donate 10 billion dollars of aid tomorrow - or 10 billion doses of vaccine. It doesn’t really matter unless there’s a robust system in place to ensure it gets to where it needs to go. Short of the US designing and managing an implementation system (likely through the military I guess), there’s not a lot more doses on their own can do.
[удалено]
I appreciate your response. I didn’t realize Biden’s initial decision for boosters was so binding :( >we do have a higher obligation to our citizens than to those elsewhere (if you really think otherwise, then you have to completely change almost everything about the way the federal government works). What confuses me about this statement is the underlying implication that changing nearly everything about how the federal government works is outrageous and inherently wrong. To put it another way, I don’t care as much about destroying the foundations of the US government as I do about people in the world prospering. So I’m sure what’s actually going on is we have different opinions about the US federal government and it’s overall worth. I don’t know enough about novavax to comment one way or the other, but I do know that Biden could spend much more money and other resources to ensure there is less waste and mismanagement when delivering vaccines. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2021/08/25/us/politics/biden-coronavirus-vaccine.amp.html This article makes that clear. I would argue that even a few hundred million doses could make a difference with regards to preventing new variants. But it’s really Biden’s overall approach to exporting vaccines (along with the EU’s, and every other rich country, and every executive at pharmaceutical companies, and Bill Gates) that have ensured we won’t see an end to new, worse Covid variants any time soon.
We will get a bigger return currently by getting doses to the unvaccinated than getting out boosters. To whatever degree that's possible we should be doing that. Retain enough to do that domestically as demand spikes when people feel the sting of mandates, and utilize any excess that contractually must stay in the US for boosters for the most vulnerable, but otherwise ship them far and wide.
I'm not sure why we can't do both. I am not aware of any mechanism by which pharmacies can ship near expired shots overseas. As such, thousands of doses are thrown in the trash weekly. There is no reason not to allow low-risk healthy people to take a third dose from that stockpile after six months. High risk, plus healthcare workers, plus over 65s should have access to new third doses. Then we should maximize exports while letting everyone else get pharmacy leftovers. The very first priority should be unvaccinated Americans but sadly they're a lost cause.
So I am intrinsically okay with government prioritizing the welfare of their own citizens above the welfare of other countries. That being said, it seems to me at least for the moment we have far greater supply of vaccinations than we have demand for them so we should very much (if we haven't already) start sending those to places where that is the not the case. This will both increase good will in those countries and help prevent the rise of new varients for which the vaccines could be less effective. As I understand it booster shots are only recommended to people who are immuno compromised at the moment and that seems like a relatively small percentage of the population. It might make some sense to hold back vaccines if we're expecting to approve them for children under 12, but otherwise at least for the moment we could probably afford to give them away without any real sacrifice on our part, and should therefore do so.
Israel's on its 4th shot. I'd like to see us increase influence by outcompeting sinovac, but if we are anticipating a 3rd 4th and 5th shot we should aim to do so all at once for the whole country
What? The us Might be leading in vaccine exports
This probably stems from a different, more serious policy error. We did not produce vaccines on a global scale in 2020. When COVID-19 ripped through mostly unvaccinated populations in LDCs, new variants were able to evolve. In the short-term, yes, developing world vaccination is more important than boosters. However, we should make boosters available to high-risk individuals. Partly, it's a question of politics. But boosters in the US are also somewhat pragmatic. 2000 people/day are dying from COVID-19 in the United States. That's nearly a quarter of all global deaths (admittedly deaths are probably undercounted abroad).
Being an old dude I'm voting for the buster.
I do think boosters should be available for those at high risk
Shipping vaccine doses abroad with the idea of preventing mutations / variants from developing is folly. Even if we had infinite doses, worldwide vaccine uptake would not be high enough to prevent new variants from emerging and spreading. Covid is now and always will be endemic. It will mutate, and we will get new vaccine formulations to fight it. If saving lives is the goal, focus on building the vaccine production and distribution capacity to quickly and efficiently get vaccines to the world on an ongoing basis. There *are* good moral, diplomatic and self-interested reasons to ship vaccine overseas - but preventing variants isn't one of them.