Even if true (and apparently some German officials are saying it isn't), the contracts go through the end of 2021 is my understanding, so that makes these announcements a bit less significant than the headlines suggests.
To be honest, it seems like there is an argument to be made that the rich countries _should_ stop buying the J&J and AZ vaccines, except perhaps to donate to poorer countries, because the mRNA vaccines are much more challenging for poorer countries to use (multiple doses, refrigeration more challenging). I wonder if the focus on (very rare) side effects is part of an effort to lay the groundwork for doing that without a huge backlash from rich country citizens.
The rich countries shouldn't stop buying they should buy and give away for sure. Not some strings-attached bullshit but just straight-up dropping refrigerated containers of them at airports.
Politics is unfortunately going to get in the way of that.
COVAX is a thing, so there's hope. But even the usual politics aside, it's going to be a hard sell if you can't even get your own population vaccinated quickly and safely.
Also, let's be realistic here - there's more to vaccine distribution than just dropping refrigerated containers of perishable vaccines off. I get the intention of the sentence, but just giving away doses is not in itself a recipe for success or helping people. Helping implementing/building medical infrastructure and expertise out is a gift that will keep on giving.
Giving away vaccines is a necessary if not sufficient condition for success, we can pile on additional conditions to the point of paralysis if we want.. but bottom-line, there are hundreds of millions if not billions of people who want vaccines that can't get them... roll those shots out!
"Never let a good crisis go to waste" as they say - political concessions would be squeezed out of nations needing the vaccine but not able to pay for it. China is doing it, the Eurozone and US are doing it. Everybody is doing it.
> I wonder if the focus on (very rare) side effects is part of an effort to lay the groundwork for doing that without a huge backlash from rich country citizens.
But that focus also undermines the use of these vaccines in poorer countries. Who will want the thing that the rich countries rejected as substandard?
To be honest, it seems like there is an argument to be made that the rich countries _should_ stop buying the J&J and AZ vaccines, except perhaps to donate to poorer countries, because the mRNA vaccines are much more challenging for poorer countries to use (multiple doses, refrigeration more challenging). I wonder if the focus on (very rare) side effects is part of an effort to lay the groundwork for doing that without a huge backlash from rich country citizens.