During the pandemic, we witnessed vaccines that were being developed, seemingly satisfying all 3 of the fast, good and cheap properties.
Is this really what happened? Do they indeed possess all those 3 features?
If yes, how did that happen? How was this emergency able to circumvent the pick 2 out of 3 notion?
From what I understood, due to the circumstances the vaccine development process was able to be expedited through cooperation between the company and the FDA. The companies most likely prioritized the vaccine project above any other projects, thus funding and support was easier to acquire. In addition, the FDA made the process easier for the companies allowing multiple phases to occur at the same time and authorizing emergency use for the vaccines after they passed certain benchmarks.
I agree with @DevDesai about how the FDA allowed multiple phases to occur as multiple researchers, scientists, and governments were internationally collaborating in order to develop and distribute an effective formulation of the COVID19 vaccine. The vaccines were developed rather quickly, but the effectiveness of the vaccine preventing fatalities when contracting the disease was present and therefore approved to be rolled out. Additionally, there was a plethora of prior research regarding coronavirus vaccine research and mRNA treatments. Because the treatment was an mRNA vaccine the materials required for the vaccine were all easily produced in a controlled laboratory setting. This allowed for fast production and distribution as well when the entire world was suffering from the pandemic.
You can read more about it here:
As mentioned, the COVID-19 vaccine development seemed to meet the fast/good/cheap criteria due to unprecedented global collaboration, funding, and existing research on coronaviruses and mRNA technology. The FDA allowed simultaneous trial phases and that sped up development. mRNA technology enabled faster production and govt subsidized costs making the vaccines more affordable. This unique situation allowed for rapid development without compromising safety or effectiveness
To address the aspect of speed in relation to the COVID-19 vaccine program, a great topic to consider was Operation Warp Speed. This project had a goal of accelerating the COVID-19 vaccine development, and saw success primarily because clinical trial phases and animal studies were analyzed to identify points of overlap. With identification of these areas of overlap, the vaccine pathway was then optimized for speedy development. There was also risk involved in operation warp speed, such as large-scale manufacturing during clinical trials, and the combining / concurrent run of clinical trials as well. Problems that could have come up in these project stages had the possibility of being more costly to address. Overall, decrease of time via optimization during project planning and increase of risk for the timeline led to the quick development of these vaccines. Considering the risk that was involved with this project, do you believe actions such as large-scale manufacturing during clinical trials were a wise decision to make? If so (or not), why?
The cheap aspect of fast-good-cheap is one topic that may be up for discussion. More specifically, much of the financial aspects of developing a vaccine was subsidized by the government and FDA instead of the pharmaceutical companies. The financial planning was shifted off of the company and allowed them to focus on speed and quality of the vaccine. When finances aren't much of a "problem," companies are able to do a lot more with efficiency. One benefit of the vaccine was that the three main companies which mass produced their vaccine already had well-established vaccine profiles, so it can be assumed they had to put forward minimal monetary resources to produce the vaccines. The government essentially made it clear that there will be a guaranteed market for the vaccine. Many times, the development of vaccines may be risky as it is unknown how it will perform in the market. Additionally, the cost to administer the vaccine was fully subsidized by the government. While "cheap" may have been the case for many of the pharmaceutical companies which manufactured the vaccine, it for sure did not come cheap for all the government entities subsidizing the vaccine costs from development to administration.
The Covid vaccine was shown to be good, cheap, and fast due to several reasons. Under normal circumstances, it would be nearly impossible to fulfill all three. During the pandemic, the government passed an emergency use authorization which took a large portion of Taxes to Medical Device companies in order to boost their vaccine development. This involved a lot of time deviated towards cooperating with the FDA to comply with their requests. In emergency cases such as these, a Medical Device company is sometimes required to complete projects funded by the government, which precedes importance from all other projects in the same time. With the money received, the vaccines can be made immediately with the most advance technology the company currently has, and very quickly. Large companies also have many lag projects that designs technology for planned emergency events.
The rapid development of COVID-19 vaccines did appear to defy the traditional "fast, good, cheap — pick two" paradigm, largely due to unprecedented global collaboration, government subsidies, and existing research infrastructure. Emergency Use Authorizations (EUAs), overlapping clinical trial phases, and investments through initiatives like Operation Warp Speed allowed manufacturers to scale production and conduct trials simultaneously — a high-risk, high-reward approach. mRNA technology, which had been under development for years, provided a platform that was quickly adaptable and easy to manufacture. While the public may have seen the vaccines as "cheap," in reality, governments bore the financial burden, allowing companies to focus on speed and quality without typical cost constraints. This unique convergence of resources, urgency, and preparedness made the extraordinary development timeline possible.
