Misguided charity: the bane of global health

The second is whether the Board of Directors of Gavi, which is funded by an array of governments, foundations, corporations and institutions,15 endorses the declaration of COVAX as a blueprint for success in emergencies. [...]much of the research by large COVID-19 vaccine manufacturers derived from research funded by taxpayers.17 There is no evidence that a TRIPS waiver on COVID-19 technologies would discourage taxpayer-funded innovations on which vaccine manufacturers rely. [...]abdication of the duty of care shows in the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation’s reported attitude to expediting equitable access to diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics, including non-exclusive, royalty-free licences to support free of charge, at-cost or cost plus limited margin supply, as in the published position of Oxford University.18 19 That attitude is at odds with the Foundation’s claim of being ‘guided by the belief that every life has equal value’.20 It is in stark contrast to Jonas Salk’s wisdom, as stated in his response to a question about ownership of the polio vaccine patent: ‘Well, the people, I would say. Could you patent the sun?’21 To resolve these problems, the World Bank and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation should unequivocally back and finance what is needed: an open-science model to ensure vaccine equity and end a pattern of dependency.22 Pontificating outside the circle of competence The WHO is central to global health leadership, but its behaviour repeatedly ignores prioritisation and comparative advantage.