91–100 of 124 posts
At least 5% of this data is bogus. I know 6 people who didn't get the dose but got a confirmation sms and I know very few people
The union government claims here and elsewhere that it is administering ‘the world’s largest vaccination drive’. I wish it were true. But China is far ahead.⁰ The website also remarks on a ‘world record of 2.5 Cr+ Vaccinations in a day’: China has reached nearly 3 crore (=30 million) as a weekly mean.¹ Vaccination was an opportunity to shine in comparison to China, but the union government seems to have moved rather…
I believe this is the graph you want: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/covid-vaccination-doses-p... Yes, China is far ahead of India, but Cuba, the UAE and Urugay are far ahead of China.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> My wife and I are under 40 and we got the vaccine for free at a government health centre. Like I said, the government reversed its stance after the Supreme Court intervened[0]. > Then some states like Delhi and Maharashtra asked to be allowed to procure vaccines on their own. Some rich states tried to procure vaccines on their own. How does that preclude the Union from extending vaccine coverage to all? And the sec…
> Some rich states tried to procure vaccines on their own. My point was that the states themselves asked to be allowed to procure the vaccines, so blaming the Union for asking them to "compete" is incorrect. As your link to the Liberalized policy states, 50% of the supply was being purchased by the Union, presumably to supply to the "poor" states. > How does that preclude the Union from extending vaccine coverage to…
No, that was meant for those above 45. At no point before the reversal did the Union government supply vaccines to states for vaccinating those under 45.
> I think the (only) Rs. 35000 crore budget should have made it clear that the government was not planning to inoculate everyone for free.
Government procures Covishield at Rs. 205 a dose. The adult population in India is about 100 crores. The budget is enough to cover the majority. Like the Supreme Court observed, the decision to exclude those under 45 was arbitrary and irrational.
> From Jan 16-Feb 28, India was inoculating only frontline workers and healthcare staff. For these AFAICT, the Union ordered 11 million vaccines in Jan[1], as you mentioned, and 14.5 million in Feb[2].
Again, SII was sitting on 50 million doses in January. Why did the government not procure them? Why did the government resort to piece-meal purchase orders? The US on the contrary ordered 300 million vaccines at once. This gave the manufacturers enough working capital to scale up production. SII did not get 3000 crore advance for the government till end of April. The shortage could have been mitigated if the government had done that in January.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Absolutely not. 90% of these doses were provided by Serum Institute, a private company, that wholly managed the relationship with AstraZeneca since the early days of the pandemic, even when the government was asking citizens to perform rituals to ward off the pandemic. The government not only played a largely passive role, but they did not even assist where they could. Before the second wave, Serum Institute was appe…
> Serum Institute was appealing for financial help to boost production capacity. But the government completely neglected that, This is not true - the govt gave Rs. 3000 crore (the asked-for amount) in aid to SII. > They jumped at it with all hands and today account for 90% of all doses administered. True, but it's likely that the government's commitment to buy 100s of millions of vaccines played no small part in givi…
The government gave SII and advace towards the end of April. This was not aid. What was the government doing until?
> True, but it's likely that the government's commitment to buy 100s of millions of vaccines played no small part in giving them the confidence to scale up the way they did.
Instead of ordering doses in bulk, the government went with piecemeal orders. The scaling up would have happened much earlier if we had actually seen decisiveness on part of the government.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Some rich states tried to procure vaccines on their own. My point was that the states themselves asked to be allowed to procure the vaccines, so blaming the Union for asking them to "compete" is incorrect. As your link to the Liberalized policy states, 50% of the supply was being purchased by the Union, presumably to supply to the "poor" states. > How does that preclude the Union from extending vaccine coverage to…
> As your link to the Liberalized policy states, 50% of the supply was being purchased by the Union, presumably to supply to the "poor" states. No, that was meant for those above 45. At no point before the reversal did the Union government supply vaccines to states for vaccinating those under 45. > I think the (only) Rs. 35000 crore budget should have made it clear that the government was not planning to inoculate ev…
Majority, yes, but not all.
> Like the Supreme Court observed, the decision to exclude those under 45 was arbitrary and irrational.
I don't disagree there.
> Again, SII was sitting on 50 million doses in January. Why did the government not procure them? Why did the government resort to piece-meal purchase orders?
Actually the govt did commit to buy 60 million, as the link I shared mentioned. As to why it did not buy outright, I'd guess it's because it didn't need them when only FLWs were being inoculated. Maybe the storage and transportation infrastructure was also not in place, but I'm just speculating here.
Edit: another reason (which I just read in an article) to order piecemeal, was apparently to keep options for other vaccines open as and when they became available. At the time there were quite a few possibilities - Pfizer, Moderna and Novavax IIRC. In hindsight this was suboptimal as Pfizer and Moderna had committed their supply elsewhere and Novavax was not completed in time.
> The US on the contrary ordered 300 million vaccines at once
Did they also pay in advance for all 300 million?
> SII did not get 3000 crore advance for the government till end of April.
SII asked for that amount only in the beginning of April[1], so that's not that much of a delay.
1. https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/outstretched-sii-c...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have always found that amusing. What a god complex that guy has. But hey if it works it works.
It doesn't work so well for muslims in India... https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/02/21/india-muslims-deported-... https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2021/country-chapters/india
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> As your link to the Liberalized policy states, 50% of the supply was being purchased by the Union, presumably to supply to the "poor" states. No, that was meant for those above 45. At no point before the reversal did the Union government supply vaccines to states for vaccinating those under 45. > I think the (only) Rs. 35000 crore budget should have made it clear that the government was not planning to inoculate ev…
> The budget is enough to cover the majority Majority, yes, but not all. > Like the Supreme Court observed, the decision to exclude those under 45 was arbitrary and irrational. I don't disagree there. > Again, SII was sitting on 50 million doses in January. Why did the government not procure them? Why did the government resort to piece-meal purchase orders? Actually the govt did commit to buy 60 million, as the link…
But including those under 45.
> Edit: another reason (which I just read in an article) to order piecemeal, was apparently to keep options for other vaccines open as and when they became available. At the time there were quite a few possibilities - Pfizer, Moderna and Novavax IIRC. In hindsight this was suboptimal as Pfizer and Moderna had committed their supply elsewhere and Novavax was not completed in time.
Moderna was not granted approval in India till June and Pfizer which was the first vaccine to apply was never approved. This is wholly unconvincing and sounds like post-facto justification.
> Did they also pay in advance for all 300 million?
Yes. Not to mention the 11 billion USD that was granted to 8 companies for development.
> SII asked for that amount only in the beginning of April[1], so that's not that much of a delay.
The government did order upfront so, there was no way for SII to figure out what the demand would be. Until April, SII was exporting vaccines for considerably more than what the government was paying. The ban on vaccine exports cut of that source.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Modi's photo is the largest thing on that page, and on every vaccine card. Lack of credit is never his problem.
I have always found that amusing. What a god complex that guy has. But hey if it works it works.
The reason Modi is highlighted is because he is perceived to be on the wrong side of center, does not know how to do it in a "classy" way and that his predecessor (Manmohan) was specifically installed as a quiet face with no power, personality or political support.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have always found that amusing. What a god complex that guy has. But hey if it works it works.
It doesn't work so well for muslims in India... https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/02/21/india-muslims-deported-... https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2021/country-chapters/india
On the contrary, average Bangladeshi muslims have neither economic (Bangladesh is marginally richer) nor societal (Bangladesh is a religious ethnostate for bengalis) reason to immigrate or seek refuge. Thus, India aims to correctly deport them back to their nation.
It is incredibly irritating to see people signal, as if the moral worth of immigration is determined and as if immigration is a good in and of itself.
Bengal is among Indias most deteriorated states since its golden years as the british center of operations. Statistically, the influx of immigrats certainly has not helped.