On Jan. 3, the Indian government granted emergency use authorization for the COVID-19 vaccine Covaxin developed by Bharat Biotech International Ltd. Indian news media praised the move, calling it the pride of the nation.
Covaxin was researched and developed by Bharat Biotech in collaboration with India’s National Institute of Virology and the Indian Council of Medical Research, using the same technology platform as China’s vaccines.
The institute and the council provided the virus strain in May last year, and in July commenced phase 1 and phase 2 clinical trials, which were carried out in 12 Indian hospitals selected by the council.
The results of the phase 1 clinical trials, which were published in the British journal The Lancet Infectious Diseases, showed that there was a good immune response to the vaccine in non-human primates. The phase 3 clinical trial began in November, and data were collected on 25,800 people in 22 Indian hospitals. It is expected to be completed next month.
However, the Drugs Controller General of India and the Central Drugs Standard Control Organization on Jan. 3 accepted the recommendations of an expert committee and granted advance approval for emergency use.
Many Indian experts and academic organizations, headed by the nation’s most famous virologist, Gagandeep Kang, objected to the decision.
Lawmaker Shashi Tharoor, a senior member of the opposition Indian National Congress party, also voiced his disagreement.
Paul Griffin, director of infectious diseases at the University of Queensland in Australia, said that he had never heard of any precedent of approving emergency use of a vaccine before completion of its phase 3 clinical trial.
As of Feb. 4, the Indian Ministry of Health and Family Welfare had been notified of 25 hospitalizations and 19 deaths of people who had received the vaccine, but Minister of Health and Family Welfare Harsh Vardhan said that the deaths were not causally related to COVID-19 vaccination and that any adverse reactions to the vaccine were minor.
Taiwan’s most experienced pharmaceutical company, Adimmune Biotech Corp, held its phase 1 clinical trial, led by professor Chang Shan-chwen (張上淳) at National Taiwan University Hospital, but discontinued the project after finding that the vaccine did not produce a satisfactory immune response. Adimmune and its research team are to be commended for their honest attitude.
On Jan. 26, US pharmaceutical firm Merck announced, for the same reason, that it had discontinued a vaccine research project it had been conducting in cooperation with France’s Pasteur Institute.
It should be noted that Merck is a well-known company with a long history and experience of making and selling vaccines, while the Pasteur Institute was the first institute in the world to engage in vaccine research.
The Food and Drug Administration has recommended that the government should purchase 10 million doses of the Taiwan-made vaccine that will definitely not proceed to its phase 3 clinical trial.
Minister of Health and Welfare Chen Shih-chung (陳時中) should give serious thought to his administrative and legal responsibilities. He should consider conducting a public opinion poll on people’s willingness to accept a Taiwan-made vaccine.
An even better idea would be to use the real-name mask rationing system for the public to register their willingness to accept locally made vaccines, to find out how many people would be willing to do so, and only then decide how many doses of which vaccine to order.
Hsieh Yen-yau is a retired professor of internal medicine at National Taiwan University College of Medicine.
Translated by Julian Clegg
Two major Chinese Communist Party (CCP)-People’s Liberation Army (PLA) power demonstrations in November 2024 highlight the urgency for Taiwan to pursue a military buildup and deterrence agenda that can take back control of its destiny. First, the CCP-PLA’s planned future for Taiwan of war, bloody suppression, and use as a base for regional aggression was foreshadowed by the 9th and largest PLA-Russia Joint Bomber Exercise of Nov. 29 and 30. It was double that of previous bomber exercises, with both days featuring combined combat strike groups of PLA Air Force and Russian bombers escorted by PLAAF and Russian fighters, airborne early warning
For three years and three months, Taiwan’s bid to join the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) has remained stalled. On Nov. 29, members meeting in Vancouver agreed to establish a working group for Costa Rica’s entry — the fifth applicant in line — but not for Taiwan. As Taiwan’s prospects for CPTPP membership fade due to “politically sensitive issues,” what strategy should it adopt to overcome this politically motivated economic exclusion? The situation is not entirely dim; these challenges offer an opportunity to reimagine the export-driven country’s international trade strategy. Following the US’ withdrawal from the Trans-Pacific Partnership
Since the end of former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration, the Ma Ying-jeou Foundation has taken Taiwanese students to visit China and invited Chinese students to Taiwan. Ma calls those activities “cross-strait exchanges,” yet the trips completely avoid topics prohibited by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), such as democracy, freedom and human rights — all of which are universal values. During the foundation’s most recent Chinese student tour group, a Fudan University student used terms such as “China, Taipei” and “the motherland” when discussing Taiwan’s recent baseball victory. The group’s visit to Zhongshan Girls’ High School also received prominent coverage in
Late on Tuesday evening, South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol declared martial law. A BBC analysis cited as reasons the opposition parties’ majority in the National Assembly, their continued boycott of the national budget and the impeachment of key officials and prosecutors, leading to frequent government gridlock. During the years that Taiwan and South Korea traveled the road to democratization, our countries hit many potholes. Taiwan cannot return to the Martial Law era. Despite the similarities in our authoritarian past, Yoon’s political travails are far removed from the issues Taiwan faces. Yoon’s actions are a wake-up call to the world about
RSS