Vaccines: The New Oil Gold Standard?
10 February 2021
In a world transformed by the COVID-19 pandemic, it has become increasingly clear that oil is no longer the gold standard of power and influence. Instead, the spotlight has shifted to pharmaceutical companies and their control over vaccines, which have emerged as the new currency of global power. The ramifications of this shift are profound, as these companies wield unprecedented influence through their access to legal frameworks and extensive lobbying efforts. As many nations scramble to secure vaccines, those unable to afford them look to the World Health Organization (WHO) for affordable alternatives to combat the coronavirus. This disparity highlights a critical issue: while vaccine distribution is a pressing concern, the economic impact of extended lockdowns and restricted travel is creating a ripple effect that many nations may not be fully prepared to handle.
The restrictions on individual travel have adversely affected domestic economies more than anticipated, leading to a troubling rise in mental health issues, including suicides—numbers that remain underreported to avoid inciting panic. Frontline workers, strained by the demands of the pandemic, are pushing beyond their limits, and the occupational health and safety structures in place are nearing breaking points. Australia, positioned as the eighth-best nation in managing the pandemic, has performed relatively well compared to others. However, questions are being raised about whether a unified national approach rather than disparate state responses would have been more effective. The cracks in political unity became evident during lockdowns as the pandemic’s effects hit individuals and families hard. Aged care facilities faced intense scrutiny as the death toll rose, revealing systemic weaknesses in protecting vulnerable populations.
Those who succumbed to COVID-19 often did so because their immune systems were unable to withstand the virus’s attack. The systems designed to control movement and identify affected individuals were inadequate, leading to further complications. It is now accepted that initial lockdowns are essential for governments to assess resources, manpower, and health facilities, including the amalgamation of private and public healthcare assets.
A comprehensive database of frontline health workers—doctors, nurses, paramedics, police, firefighters, and essential service personnel—should have been established to facilitate better management of the pandemic. Unfortunately, many nations were slow to prepare their citizens for the impending crisis, resorting to heavy-handed methods of control that often-misused law enforcement.
In Australia, for instance, police in Victoria faced backlash for their handling of lockdown enforcement, leading to chaos and a breakdown of public trust. The optics of their actions, coupled with poor media coverage, created a scenario where the police were seen as the antagonists rather than protectors. As we mark twelve months since the world began to grasp the dangers posed by COVID-19, one cannot help but wonder if things could have been managed differently. The media had a unique opportunity to promote positive narratives and support governmental efforts, yet it often opted for sensationalism, amplifying fears rather than providing solutions.
With reports of new, more dangerous strains of the virus emerging, such as the variant from South Africa, European nations are bracing for a potential third wave. Germany’s concerns about vaccine effectiveness have led to discussions of renewed lockdown restrictions, a response that could reverberate across the continent. My own experience of being in my third lockdown for four months has offered a unique perspective. Isolated from mainstream civilization, I have learned to adapt, but the harsh realities of winter and confinement can be daunting.
Interestingly, the Russian vaccine was the first to be introduced, only to face criticism for its rapid development. Meanwhile, Western nations touted the Oxford and Pfizer vaccines as the gold standard, claiming effectiveness rates upwards of 90%. However, the Chinese vaccine, distributed to African and Middle Eastern nations, has fallen short of expectations. Recent endorsements from UK medical experts declaring the Russian vaccine more effective than initially thought have sparked new discussions, highlighting the evolving landscape of vaccine efficacy. So, what does this mean for the average citizen? Unfortunately, it translates to more negative media coverage and an inflating profit margin for pharmaceutical companies, which are raking in billions while many continue to suffer.
Reflecting on an article I penned in March 2020, I advised calmness and urged governments to learn from past experiences to manage the pandemic effectively. Looking back, I am pleased to say my views remain consistent: social distancing, good hygiene practices, and vigilance are still paramount. The economy should not suffer as a direct result of the pandemic, borders should not be closed indefinitely, and governments must act responsibly and collectively in the interest of national well-being.
Another unexpected beneficiary of the pandemic has been internet service providers, whose revenues have soared as citizens turn to social media and remote communication platforms like Zoom for interaction.
Pharmaceutical companies and wealthy nations must recognize their responsibilities extend beyond mere profit. Vaccines cannot be treated as the new gold standard; they should be seen as a global necessity that requires equitable distribution and access. If these companies fail to acknowledge their role in the global health landscape, they may soon find themselves held accountable for their actions—or lack thereof.
History will ultimately judge what strategies proved effective and which did not. In the meantime, we must remain vigilant, prioritize prevention, and uphold good hygiene practices as we navigate the uncharted waters of this pandemic.
Peter Adamis
Freelance Journalist