Multiple Vaccines but No Medicine for COVID-19?

Are vaccines the only answer to beating COVID-19? Could a similar investment in development of a medicine be a more effective and safer alternative?

Multiple vaccines becoming available for COVID-19 is a matter for great relief for all mankind. The short cycle of research and emergency approval for usage does leave a strain of uncertainty in people’s mind, but still this seems to be the best solution at the moment, especially for the high-risk segment of the population.

However, a question which remains unanswered is why there is so much investment and focus on vaccines but not as much on medicine? It may be because of the reason that the cost of research of a medicine is generally higher than vaccine. The answer could be more technical in nature which may not be visible or understandable by larger cross-section but the commercial and social side of the issue is easier to visualize.

As of January 2021, out of the world population of 7,673 million, 93 million got infected by COVID-19. Of those infected, 66 million have already recovered, with around 2 million unfortunate deaths. Currently, there are around 24 million active cases, which are in the recovery phase. If we go by these numbers, the larger picture is that there is a need for medicine for 24 million people (a reducing trend) and a vaccine requirement for at least 5,511 million (assuming 70% of total population needing vaccination to reach herd immunity). That means the vaccine requirement is over 200 times more than that of medicine!

One wonders if that is the reason why there is so much more focus on vaccines than medicine. It is understandable from the point of pharma giants, who spend billions of dollars for research, to make their investment decisions based on revenue potential and profitability. In the absence of meaningful returns to them over a period of time, future research may get severely impacted, which will be extremely harmful for mankind. Therefore, there is nothing wrong if the organizations decide their priority based on such commercial parameters.

The economics of distributing and administering medicine seem to be much less complicated than vaccines. In that regard, perhaps there should be a greater focus on developing an effective medicine against COVID-19.

If the same question of priority of medicine vs. vaccine is to be viewed from a social point of view, the decision is likely to be reversed. The vaccine has been approved on priority for emergency use, needs to be administered to more than 2,000 million people (assuming 25% population to be covered) and may have some side effects, which cannot be envisaged at this stage but could be painful in the future. Also, the vaccine does not assure of complete safety from the virus. In addition, a one time huge expenditure for transportation, distribution and administration of vaccines is being borne by respective government bodies.

On the other hand, if a medicine was made available, even with 50% efficacy, it would need to be administered to only 25 million people (1.2% of number of people for vaccine) with much higher likelihood of managing any possible adverse effect, as these COVID-19 patients are already undergoing treatment under medical supervision.

While the above analysis may be more of a engineer's viewpoint for a medical problem, it definitely provides an important point to ponder.

Should all nations and world bodies like WHO and the UN be giving increased attention to medicine research independent of vaccines?

I would personally look forward to a more social solution and would have preferred availability of a medicine before a vaccine.

What do you think? Do share your views.

For Share and Like – use below links

For any Services or further Insights/ Support - Contact using form below