I'm sorry, I have a hard time believing we don't have enough 'experts in the field'. The number of scientist working at these few companies is minuscule compared to the greater academic world. It's not a lack of capable experts, it's the lack of dissemination of critical knowledge to these experts. We should be approaching this scientifically and sharing this information to institutions worldwide, not letting a few western companies profiteer off a global pandemic.
What if the situation were reversed? What if another country like China developed the vaccine first while people in the west died because we didn't have access to the vital information we needed to make it ourselves and Chinese companies wouldn't share it for those same reasons? Would you still agree?
> We should be approaching this scientifically and sharing this information to institutions worldwide.
Yes, we should. The entire patent system needs to be removed and replaced.
The issue comes down to widescale manufacturing, and ensuring that they can be made safely and in controlled environments. This vaccine should 100% be made public, from the carrier methods, to the specific genome (something that has already been released).
But here is where I have a moral quandary, if a newcomer (money hungry, greedy) manufacturing group decided to start producing the vaccine, and due to poor management, poor material choices, Q/A issues, &c began running afoul and they decided to either distort the truth and continue to outright sell the vaccine, or to offload to other places with lesser safeguards especially in smaller or 'third-world countries'— a term I despise. Then that would both harm the overall image of the vaccine, would harm the general trust, and would potentially set back entire populations by decades.
With the patent comes responsibility, and the ability to safeguard what your research can be ascribed to.
I agree that the research should be released, should be used, and eventually should become free for all (on the cusp or direct outset of this plague) ala Jonas Salk[1].
> What if another country like China developed the vaccine first
If a government is the main developers of a vaccine, then yes it should be free and open from the offset. But, if you remove the capabilities from business' to own their works you destroy nearly all initial incentives that they have to take risks on novel techniques or overall manufacturing. Is that the right mindset to have? Not at all. That's a horribly depressing mindset, but it's sadly the truth for almost all investor groups and boards around the world.
As said, this is a moral quandary. I wish for a fully scientific economy and culture, but to work within the confines of modern day greed this is sadly likely the only approach. I hope to be proven wrong, and I hope governments around the world step in and force corporations to give up their patents for the betterment of the world.
[1]. although he didn't patent for altruistic reasons as most believe, at the time he wouldn't have been eligible to patent due to the vaccine not being 'novel enough' as his lawyers put it.
What if the situation were reversed? What if another country like China developed the vaccine first while people in the west died because we didn't have access to the vital information we needed to make it ourselves and Chinese companies wouldn't share it for those same reasons? Would you still agree?