Quick thread on COIs + the fast-moving WTO waiver policy conversation.

Several folks flipped me this smart, well-written piece on @PetrieFlom blog. https://blog.petrieflom.law.harvard.edu/2021/05/05/covid-vaccine-patent-waiver/

In the piece, the authors make several points that raise questions about how tech transfer will actually work and whether it might actually slow down vaccine production. In particular, b/c of the involvement of HQP in the process:

I stumbled on that paragraph. How was that author involved in the negotiations? So I scrolled to the bottom of the blog to find affiliation info + any disclosures. This is what is provided:

Not much there, so I googled and found more:

A couple of points follow.

1. Even with the link to her bio embedded on the Petrie-Flom page, that disclosure should be front + centre. This piece is circulating fast. The author's relationships with industry should be OBVIOUS and not a click away.

Do better @PetrieFlom

2. COIs should be transparent, period. Even more fundamentally, it is critical to understand how they might inform the points being made in this piece.

Is it possible, for e.g., that the worry about involving HQP does a discredit to other firms - generic firms, govt labs, or firms in the Global South - that may have more know-how in-house than first-mover companies tend to imagine?

It sure is. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/05/biden-has-power-vaccinate-world/618802/

Many are asking will the waiver speed things up. That is indeed the key question. And the answer is we do not know.

What we do know is that the status quo is not working.

The waiver is a necessary part of more transformative change.