UNESCO’s International Bioethics Committee (IBC) and
the World Commission on the Ethics of Scientific Knowledge and Technology (COMEST)
have called for a change of course in current COVID-19 vaccination strategies,
urging that vaccines be treated as a global public good to ensure they are made
equitably available in all countries, and not only to those who bid the highest
for these vaccines. Both committees have a long track record in providing
ethical guidance on sensitive issues*.
|
|
|
Vaccine filling at IDT Biologika in Dessau Fill & finish
of vaccines at IDT Biologika in Dessau, Germany, copyright: IDT
Biologika
|
The statement was presented during an online event on 24 February, which
gathered UNESCO’s ethics bodies together with Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus,
Director-General of the World Health Organization, and Professor Jeffrey Sachs
from Columbia University.
“When vaccination
campaigns were announced across the globe, the world breathed a sigh of relief,”
said UNESCO Director-General Audrey Azoulay. “Without solidarity, we are far
from achieving this goal, and over 130 countries have yet to receive a single
dose and the most vulnerable, so far, are not protected.”
While some advanced countries have secured enough vaccines to protect their
entire population two, three or five times over, the global south is being left
behind. As things stand today, the inhabitants of many developing countries will
not have access to vaccines until well into 2022. The latest announcements by
the G7 are welcome, but they need to be translated into effective delivery of
vaccines in developing countries.
“We will not end the pandemic anywhere until we end it everywhere, said Dr
Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus. “Ultimately vaccine equity is not just the right
thing to do, it is the best way to control the pandemic, restore confidence and
reboot the global economy. So, I welcome the UNESCO ethics commissions'
statement on vaccine equity and solidarity. It is very timely. (...) Together we
can end the pandemic!”
Professor Sachs called on the IMF to allow for developing countries to draw on
Special Drawing Rights to finance the development of vaccines, adding that
developed countries should show more solidarity and contribute to funding the
COVAX facility. “It is a tiny fraction of the trillions that have been spent in
addressing the pandemic. But it is the last mile to ensure that COVID-19 goes
away effectively,” said Professor Sachs.
The IBC-COMEST Statement stresses three key
messages:
Firstly, pharmaceutical industries have a responsibility to share the
intellectual property acquired with government support to enable manufacturers
in all countries to provide access to vaccines for all, which should be
considered a global public good. The IBC and COMEST also stress the
responsibility of the pharmaceutical industry to invest in factories capable of
producing vaccines of the highest possible efficacy and facilitating rapid
distribution where needed.
Secondly, the IBC and COMEST say that the vaccine’s benefit to the greatest
number of people cannot be considered the sole ethical criterion. Equality,
equity, protection from vulnerability, reciprocity and the best interests of
children must also be taken into account. Furthermore, decisions on fair
distribution and prioritization should be based on the advice of a
multidisciplinary group of experts in bioethics, law, economics, and sociology,
together with scientists.
Thirdly, the IBC and COMEST consider that vaccination strategies should be based
on a non-compulsory, non-punitive model, grounded in information and education,
including dialogue with people who may be hesitant about vaccination or hostile
to it. Refusing to be vaccinated should not affect the individual’s fundamental
rights, specifically his or her right to access healthcare or employment.
Other issues the statement covers include: international cooperation across all
different sectors working on COVID-19 to share the benefits of research; the
sustainability issues that favour the emergence of zoonotic diseases; trust in
science and healthcare authorities; the indispensable need for dialogue between
science, ethics, politics and civil society.
****
*UNESCO has a long
track record of providing ethical guidance on sensitive subjects, including the
Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights and the
Universal Declaration on the Human Genome and Human Rights.
****
The full
statement can be accessed here:
https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000375608