So who should have priority in receiving the vaccine, when available? Most vulnerable? Senior citizens? First Responders? Medical staff? Military? Politicians? The wealthy? School age? Teachers? My vote, not that I have or will have one, and assuming the vaccine is safe, is school age and teachers, particularly start up elementary schools and their activities. It is unhealthy to keep then in quarantine and remote learning is not so great. Start there and build out to other priorities. Myself and me senior colleagues should go last. Although vulnerable, the strong will still survive.
Sorry but i disagree. Politicians first.. If it kills them then we are safe.... And we live knowing the vaccine don't work.
If you look at the NIATF facebook site, it's full of little else lately. There is already a likely priority list being thrown around - indigent people; medical employees; police; other frontliners first, then other 'Filipino citizens'. Estimated to start second quarter of 2021 at earliest. Likely to be 50m shots available (enough for 25m people to have the two shots needed). 20% of the population! We won't see any effect from this until 12 months hence.
I think the excitement is a bit premature. Pfizer has a long history of fraud, corruption and greed, there is zero transparency in the vaccine studies and the CEO sold a large chunk of his shares in the company, conveniently, right after the announcement and stock shares went up.
Incomplete data released. As for the fraud, corruption and greed...they are a pharmaceutical company, do I really need to provide a source for that? Lying about the safety of a drug. That's reassuring to know with a rushed vaccine coming out. Illegal marketing and false claims. There are thousands more settlements and lawsuits with many more pending, these are just two of the largest. I'm sure that's just coincidence. Not planned out at all. No, sir. A pharmaceutical CEO would never do anything corrupt. They also claim they took no money from the USG for the vaccine but they most certainly did take a pre-order. However... Note: this is from their own website. I'm not saying that their vaccine isn't as they claim...just saying that, given their history of blatant lies and misrepresentation of the truth for political/financial/legal reasons, perhaps we should wait to see if they are telling they truth.
Not this time. Corporate organizations are made up of different groups of people. The marketing group is distinctly separate from the researchers/engineering/technicians. It is the marketing group that lies. The good news is the demand is so high and the scientific interest so strong that the the marketing side of the business will not be involved. No need to market what many people already know they want. BTW. A thank you to Bill Gates for speeding up the research on mRNA-based vaccine technologies back in 2015. https://www.gatesfoundation.org/Media-Center/Press-Releases/2015/03/CureVac-Collaboration
How have you came to this conclusion? Has the vaccine gone into mass production and trial data been released? And who put out the press release about the vaccine? I would think their marketing group would be in charge of press releases and much of the content on their website (and also what they allow those researchers, engineers and technicians are allowed to say publicly since they are bound by non-disclosure agreements). Every single word these large corporations put out there is very carefully crafted and reviewed by lawyers. I really hope that they are telling the truth and the vaccine is exactly as they are leading it on to be. Only time will tell if they have strayed from their well established corrupt business practices. You don't think there is any reason they would benefit from prematurely claiming victory through a marketing campaign over their competitors? I think their CEO just proved their was some benefit to being the first by selling nearly 65% of his share in the company. If they were being completely transparent why not release the entire trial data for peer review?
Also when large share holders dump their stock the price normally goes down if enough volume is flogged,, perfect opportunity to buy back again cheaply.. and six months down the road it will be exactly where it was before.
He wasn't a very large share holder. I think less than $6 million USD (after the announcement), basically nothing for a company with billions. He turned about a $1.5M USD profit in a day. However, having your CEO drop a significant portion of his shares does send a signal to other shareholders. Wait a minute...sh*t, I have 80 shares of Pfizer. Disregard everything here, everything is exactly as Pfizer said or, most likely, even better. All butterflies and rainbows.
