Priced out of protection: Ana Santos Rutschman on the politics of vaccine distribution

Should countries attempt to get dibs on a COVID-19 vaccine for their own citizens, even if it comes at the expense of more vulnerable populations in other countries? Ana Santos Rutschman, a law professor who specializes in health law and emerging health technologies, asks this question in her June 25, 2020 essay published in The Conversation. Her analysis of how governments are jockeying to sign pre-purchase agreements with vaccine manufacturers demonstrates the danger of nationalist policies for global health.

Ana Santos Rutschman–"How ‘Vaccine Nationalism’ Could Block Vulnerable Populations’ Access to COVID-19 Vaccines," The Conversation, 17 June 2020

 

1. Rutschman introduces the concept of “vaccine nationalism.” Explain this term in your own words. According to Rutschman, what are the major problems with vaccine nationalism for developing countries, for the process of vaccine development, and for global public health?
   
2. Rutschman argues that even though the U.S. is a major world power and can secure vaccine pre-purchase agreements, U.S. citizens might still be unable to get the COVID-19 vaccine. How is this possible? Who would be most likely to be left out, and how is this connected to the structure of the U.S. health care system? What are other ways vaccine manufacturers might be able to secure profits in lieu of high prices to the consumer?
3. In the final section of her argument, Rutschman sketches out a naysayer argument, explaining the benefits of pre-purchase agreements to manufacturers. Identify where in the text you see her using templates from Chapter 6 to plant this naysayer and make a concession while still standing her ground. What do you think? What role should international institutions play in determining who gets access to vaccines, and what might be a good model for distributing vaccines? Use a template from Chapter 4 to respond to Rutschman’s proposal.
4. Rutchsman states, “Nationalism is at odds with global health priorities.” Her argument comes at a time when nationalist movements are growing across the world, from Brexit in the UK, “America First” slogans in the U.S., and the Hindu National Party in India. Explain what nationalism is in your own words (you might check out historian Jill Lepore’s 2019 essay about the distinctions among “nationalism” and “patriotism”). What are the fundamental principles of nationalist movements, and how are they “at odds” with the global health challenges we face? Why does this matter? Compose a response to the “so what?” and “who cares?” questions for Rutschman’s argument against nationalism, using templates from Chapter 7.

Comments

[Anna P.]

1). Vaccine nationalism, to me, is one country’s focus on securing a needed vaccine for their population without thinking of other countries that may not be able to afford such an agreement. In other words, a country is able to use purchasing power and negotiate with vaccine manufacturers to set aside a specific number of doses for their population within the country before access is available to all countries.
In Rutschman’s article I agree with her main argument that a major problem with this act is that it causes an imbalance in the global public health setting. Developed countries securing vaccines for their own population first, hurts underdeveloped countries because they lack the money to engage in such purchasing agreements. As a result, developing countries are then unable provide their population with basic medical necessities, worsening conditions of diseases within their population, such as the COVID-19 virus.
Furthermore, future vaccine development is hurt by vaccine nationalism due to the fact that many countries partake in the creation of vaccinations for the world. In my opinion, making it harder for developing countries to gain access to necessary vaccines leads to future issues in creating vaccines. These countries may not want to partake in the effort of developing a future needed vaccine, despite having the means to, knowing that they won’t have the purchasing power to make it available to their population.
With an outlook on equal global public health, I support Rutschman’s opinion that a system should be in place to make vaccines both accessible and affordable to all countries during a crisis such as a pandemic. Developed countries that are able to secure doses just for their population should take initiative and lead in the effort to make vaccines available to all populations, not just their own.