Antivirals Also Follow the Money

The rapid development of the vaccines for Covid19 was a science triumph. The most disappointing aspect, however, was that these medications (certainly initially) mostly finished up in rich nations, with the poor missing out. Fairly obviously, pharmaceutical industries have to more than recoup their research investments. The companies were, however, heavily subsidised in vaccine development, by government funds, university expertise and the regulators who facilitated the required tests. Profits for 'Big pharma' appear to have been a major consideration. The companies (and their 'home' nations) have not been very receptive (in most cases) to allowing cheaper versions of 'their' vaccines to be manufactured. The same now appears to be happening with anti-virals (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/feb/20/covid-treatment-pill-big-pharma-antiviral-drugs). Othoman Mellouk (International Treatment Preparedness Coalition) notes that Pfizer and Merck are both releasing antivirals (respectively, Paxlovid and Molnupiravir) on to the markets. Anti-virals can be used to treat especially vulnerable people (e.g. those with impaired immune systems). These drugs will also initially go to richer countries. The Pfizer drug costs $530 for a 5 day course and the Merck alternative, $700. Pfizer and Merck will later decide who gets to make cheaper, generic versions of the drugs for sales to poorer regions. The availability of life-saving medicines shouldn't simply depend on 'market forces'. Both vaccines and anti-virals are needed everywhere, in drives to reduce the incidence of Covid19, with the generation of new viral variants. There must be a better way?