Conversation

This Tweet is from a suspended account. Learn more

Replying to

Well, yes, but I expect that they would have done that under a different regulatory (and vaccine purchasing) regime, which is what I would advocate for. I don't think it's fair to pin this on the companies in this case.

This Tweet is from a suspended account. Learn more

Replying to

Uh, I think we are using words in different ways here. The regulatory framework is definitely an obstacle for the vaccine boosters (and in your day job example), at least as I mean it. At minimum, in the absence of the regulator at all, neither of those things would be held up.

Replying to

and

We could also see how regulatory choices affect decision making by companies on the margin. For example, the R&D costs for enough trial data to convince me to take a booster dose are small: probably less than $100k. At the price I'd pay for one, it's easy to make that back.

Replying to

and

On the other hand, with FDA standards the cost of enough trials to get FDA authorization is much greater. And with our vaccine purchasing regime, earning the money back is much harder, too.

Replying to

and

The key point I'm making here is that regulatory burden can totally shift rational decision making on the part of the companies, especially at the margin, even though it is physically possible to meet the regulatory requirements.

This Tweet is from a suspended account. Learn more

Nicholas Schiefer

@nschiefer

Replying to

@voretaq7

I'd be stunned if this kind of thinking doesn't have massive effects on at least the *timing* of when we see things, because we've seen that happen again and again during COVID. And of course timing matters a lot, especially in a pandemic.

11:50 PM · Aug 11, 2021Twitter Web App