Governments Sign Secret Vaccine Deals. Here’s What They Hide. NYT 20210128 Taimocracy翻譯

Governments Sign Secret Vaccine Deals. Here’s What They Hide.

Multibillion-dollar contracts give drug makers liability shields, patent ownership and leeway on delivery dates and pricing — and promises that much of it will not be made public.

By Matt Apuzzo and Selam Gebrekidan

Published Jan. 28, 2021Updated Feb. 24, 2021

BRUSSELS — When members of the European Parliament sat down this month to read the first publicly available contract for purchasing coronavirus vaccines, they noticed something missing. Actually, a lot missing.  當歐洲議會成員本月坐下來閱讀第一份公開可用的購買冠狀病毒疫苗的契約時，他們注意到缺少一些東西。 其實，缺了很多。

The price per dose? Redacted. The rollout schedule? Redacted. The amount of money being paid up front? Redacted. 每劑的價格？ 被塗黑。 推出時間表？被塗黑。 預付的金額是多少？被塗黑。

And that contract, between the German pharmaceutical company CureVac and the European Union, is considered one of the world’s most transparent.

Governments have poured billions of dollars into helping drug companies develop vaccines and are spending billions more to buy doses. But the details of those deals largely remain secret, with governments and public health organizations acquiescing to drug company demands for secrecy. 各國政府已投入數十億美元幫助製藥公司開發疫苗，並花費數十億美元購買疫苗。 但這些交易的細節在很大程度上仍然是保密的，政府和公共衛生組織默許了製藥公司的保密要求。

Just weeks into the vaccination campaign, that secrecy is already making accountability difficult. The drug companies Pfizer and AstraZeneca recently announced that they would miss their European delivery targets, causing widespread concern as dangerous virus variants spread. But the terms of their contracts remain closely guarded secrets, making it difficult to question company or government officials about either blame or recourse. 但他們的契約條款仍然嚴格保密，因此很難就責任或追索權向公司或政府官員提出質疑。

Available documents, however, suggest that drug companies demanded and received flexible delivery schedules, patent protection and immunity from liability if anything goes wrong. In some instances, countries are prohibited from donating or reselling doses, a ban that could hamper efforts to get vaccines to poor countries. 然而，現有文件表明，製藥公司要求並獲得靈活的交付時間表、專利保護和在出現任何問題時免於承擔責任。 在某些情況下，禁止國家捐贈或轉售疫苗，這一禁令可能會阻礙向貧窮國家提供疫苗的努力。

Governments are cutting at least three types of vaccine deals: Some are buying directly from pharmaceutical companies. Others are buying through regional bodies like the European Union or the African Union. Many will turn to the nonprofit Covax program, an alliance of more than 190 countries, which is buying from the drug makers with an eye toward making vaccines available worldwide, especially to poor countries free or at reduced cost. Some governments have signed deals with manufacturers and Covax alike. 政府正在削減至少三種疫苗交易：一些直接從製藥公司購買。 其他人則通過歐盟或非洲聯盟等區域機構購買。 許多人將求助於非營利性的 Covax 計劃，這是一個由 190 多個國家組成的聯盟，該計劃正在從製藥商那裡購買疫苗，著眼於在全球範圍內提供疫苗，特別是向貧窮國家免費或以更低的成本提供疫苗。 一些政府已經與製造商和 Covax 簽署了協議。

The United States has secured 400 million doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines, enough for 200 million people, and is close to arranging 200 million additional doses by summer, with options to buy up to 500 million more. It also has advance purchase agreements for more than 1 billion doses from four other companies whose inoculations do not yet have U.S. regulatory approval.

The European Commission, the European Union’s executive branch negotiating on behalf of its 27 member states, has nearly 2.3 billion doses under contract and is negotiating for about 300 million more, according to data collected by UNICEF and Airfinity, a science analytics company.

Covax says it has agreements for just over 2 billion vaccine doses although it, too, is keeping its contracts secret. Only about a dozen of the 92 countries that qualify for vaccine subsidies under the alliance have managed to secure separate deals with individual companies, for a combined 500 million doses.

Despite the secrecy, government and regulatory documents, public statements, interviews and the occasional slip-up have revealed some key details about the vaccine deals. Here is what we learned.

Governments Helped Create Vaccines  政府幫忙研製疫苗

Vaccine development is a risky venture. Companies rarely invest in manufacturing until they’re sure their vaccines are effective and can win government approval. That’s part of why it typically takes so long to develop and roll them out. 疫苗開發是一項冒險的事業。 公司很少投資於製造，直到他們確定他們的疫苗是有效的並且可以獲得政府的批准。 這就是為什麼開發和推出它們通常需要這麼長時間的部分原因。

To speed up that process, governments — primarily the United States and Europe — and nonprofit groups like the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, or CEPI, absorbed some or all of that risk. 為了加快這一進程，各國政府——主要是美國和歐洲——以及流行病防範創新聯盟 (CEPI) 等非營利組織承擔了部分或全部風險。

Read More on the Coronavirus Pandemic

• New Guidelines: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention loosened its Covid-19 guidance, saying those exposed to the virus no longer need to quarantine.
• A Sweeping Rebuke: Dr. Rochelle P. Walensky, the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said that her agency had failed to respond quickly enough to the coronavirus pandemic and needed to be overhauled.
• Back to School: New York City’s Education Department has rolled back most Covid restrictions ahead of the start of school on Sept. 8, reflecting a wider shift toward learning how to live with the virus.
• A Century-Old Vaccine: The results of clinical trials, launched in the early days of the pandemic, involving an old tuberculosis vaccine offered hope that it could provide a measure of universal protection against infectious diseases.

The United States, for example, committed up to $1.6 billion to help the Maryland-based company Novavax develop its coronavirus vaccine, according to regulatory filings. CEPI kicked in up to about $400 million in grants and no-interest loans.

Other companies have received even more help. The Massachusetts biotech company Moderna not only used government-developed technology as the foundation of its vaccine, it also received about $1 billion in government grants to develop the drug. In August, the government then placed an initial order for the vaccine for $1.5 billion. The company has said that the project was paid for entirely by the federal government.  Moderna 不僅使用政府開發的技術作為疫苗的基礎，還獲得了大約 10 億美元的政府撥款來開發這種藥物。

These types of arrangements were designed to help companies jump-start manufacturing and cover costs such as clinical testing.

But Companies Keep the Patents  但製藥公司擁有專利所有權

Despite the tremendous taxpayer investments, typically the drug companies fully own the patents. That means that companies can decide how and where the vaccines get manufactured and how much they cost. As the CureVac contract explains it, the company “shall be entitled to exclusively exploit any such” property rights. 儘管納稅人進行了大量投資，但通常製藥公司完全擁有專利。

This has been a matter of contention for months. A coalition of countries, led by India and South Africa, have petitioned the World Trade Organization to waive intellectual property rights so generic drug makers can begin producing the vaccines. The World Health Organization has endorsed the idea, but it is all but doomed by opposition from the United States and Europe, whose drug makers say patents, and the profits that flow from them, are the lifeblood of innovation.

“Governments are creating artificial scarcity,” said Zain Rizvi of the watchdog group Public Citizen. “When the public funds knowledge that is required to end a pandemic, it shouldn’t be kept a secret.” “政府正在製造人為的稀缺，”監督組織 Public Citizen 的 Zain Rizvi 說。 “當公眾匯集智慧來結束疫情時，不應該被列入機密。”

Prices Will Vary  價格是變化很大

One of the key terms of the vaccine contracts — the price per dose — is frequently redacted in the public versions of government contracts. The companies consider this a trade secret. Some drug companies have included clauses in their supply contracts that allow them to suspend deliveries if countries reveal the price.

By insisting that their pricing remains confidential, the drug makers have the upper hand over government negotiators who do not know what other countries are paying.  疫苗契約的關鍵條款之一——每劑的價格——經常在政府契約的公開版本中被修改。這些公司認為這是商業秘密。一些製藥公司在其供應契約中包含條款，讓他們得在各國披露價格時暫停供貨。

通過堅持對他們的定價保密，製藥商在不知道其他國家支付什麼費用的政府談判者面前佔了上風。

While governments accepted that provision, leaks and some official reports show some of the disparities. The European Commission paid $2.19 for every dose of the vaccine developed by the University of Oxford and AstraZeneca, while South Africa paid more than twice as much, $5.25, according to media reports. 雖然政府接受了這一規定，但洩密和一些官方報告顯示了一些差異。 據媒體報導，歐盟委員會為牛津大學和阿斯利康開發的每劑疫苗支付了 2.19 美元，而南非支付了 5.25 美元的兩倍多。

Drug companies did not respond to requests to view their unredacted contracts or explain why secrecy was necessary. A spokeswoman for Moderna pointed only to a regulatory document that said the contract “contains terms and conditions that are customary.” 製藥公司沒有回應查看其未經編輯的合同或解釋為什麼需要保密的請求。 Moderna 的一位女發言人只指出了一份監管文件，該文件稱合同“包含慣例的條款和條件”。

That is why it caused such a stir last month when a Belgian official mistakenly revealed a price list, which showed that United States taxpayers were paying $19.50 per dose for the Pfizer vaccine, while Europeans paid $14.70. 這就是為什麼上個月比利時官員錯誤地披露了一份價目表，顯示美國納稅人為輝瑞疫苗每劑支付 19.50 美元，而歐洲人支付 14.70 美元時，引起瞭如此大的轟動。

Dag Inge Ulstein, Norway’s minister of international development, said countries and international organizations must do more to make contracts public. He also called on countries to share vaccine technology and said rich governments should donate vaccines to poor countries early — even while still vaccinating their own citizens, as Norway plans to do. 挪威國際發展部長 Dag Inge Ulstein 表示，各國和國際組織必須採取更多措施將契約公之於眾。 他還呼籲各國分享疫苗技術，並表示富國政府應儘早向窮國捐贈疫苗——即使仍在為本國公民接種疫苗的同時，挪威也計劃這樣做。

“There must be transparency related to the agreements on procurements,” he said in an interview. To that end, he shared with The New York Times his country’s purchase agreement with Covax. That organization has refused to make public its deals — either with the drug makers or with the countries it is selling to. “採購協議必須具有透明度，”他在接受採訪時說。 為此，他與《紐約時報》分享了他所在國家與 Covax 的採購協議。 該組織拒絕公開其交易——無論是與製藥商還是與它所銷售的國家。

Covax contracts with countries assume a cost of $10.55 per dose but warn that the final cost could be higher after including an “access/speed premium,” which Covax said is used to help companies rush their vaccines to market. Covax 與各國簽訂的契約假設每劑成本為 10.55 美元，但警告稱，在包括“訪問/速度溢價”後，最終成本可能會更高，Covax 稱該溢價用於幫助公司將疫苗推向市場。

Donations and Resales Are Restricted  限制捐贈與轉售

Public health advocates have called on wealthy countries — which have all but cornered the market on the early doses — to donate or sell vaccines to poor countries. But contracts may restrict buyers’ ability to export doses, which could depress drug company sales. 公共衛生倡導者呼籲富裕國家——它們幾乎壟斷了早期疫苗的市場——向貧窮國家捐贈或出售疫苗。 但契約可能會限制買家出口疫苗的能力，這可能會抑制製藥公司的銷售。

The CureVac contract, for example, prohibits European countries from reselling, exporting or donating doses — including to Covax — without permission from the company. Some contracts in the United States have similar restrictions.

A spokesman for the European Commission has said the companies included that provision to guarantee that, wherever their drugs were used, they were covered by the same legal protections. 這些公司加入了這一條款，以保證無論在何處使用他們的藥物，他們都受到同樣的法律保護。

And governments are trying to find other ways to restrict exports. 各國政府正試圖尋找其他限制出口的方法。

On Tuesday, Germany lobbied the European Commission to allow its member states to block exports of vaccines to countries outside of the bloc after the stuttering start of vaccine distribution in Europe. 在歐洲開始分發疫苗後，德國遊說歐盟委員會允許其成員國阻止向歐盟以外的國家出口疫苗。

Vaccines Arrive When They Arrive  疫苗會到時就會到

Delivery times are considered proprietary information, so there are no public benchmarks to measure a company against. 交貨時間被認為是專屬訊息，因此不會公開的基準來衡量公司。

Nowhere is that clearer than in the European Union’s fight with AstraZeneca over the company’s announcement that it would not deliver the expected number of doses in the first quarter of this year. European officials say they received specific, contractual assurances for such deliveries. The company says it promised only to make its best efforts to hit those targets.  AstraZeneca表示，它承諾只會盡最大努力實現這些目標。

European officials, who initially agreed to keep the contract secret, have now asked the company to make it public. Unless that happens, there’s no way to assess who is responsible. 最初同意對契約保密的歐洲官員現在要求該公司將其公開。 除非發生這種情況，否則無法評估誰負責。

But there is no question that the drug makers have built themselves plenty of wiggle room for such an ambitious, complicated rollout. The CureVac contract says that the delivery dates (which are all redacted) should be considered estimates. “No product or only reduced volumes of the product may be available at the estimated delivery dates,” the contract reads. Similar provisions exist in other contracts. 但毫無疑問，製藥商已經為自己建立了足夠的迴旋餘地來進行如此雄心勃勃、複雜的推廣。 CureVac 合同規定交貨日期（均已被塗黑）應視為估計值。 契約中寫道：“在預計的交貨日期，可能沒有產品或只有減少數量的產品可用。” 其他契約也有類似規定。

Nearly every vaccine maker has similarly told investors that they might not hit their targets. “We may not be able to create or scale up manufacturing capacity on a timely basis,” Pfizer warned in a corporate filing last August. Pfizer說：我們可能無法及時創建或擴大製造能力

That uncertainty has frustrated health officials. When Pfizer recently told Italy that it was temporarily cutting deliveries by 29 percent, the government said it was considering taking the company to court. That lawsuit, if it materializes, could make public some details of the European Union’s contract with Pfizer, which remains entirely secret.

“At one point they promised more vaccines or faster vaccines,” said Steven Van Gucht, the Belgian government’s top virologist. “And in the end they couldn’t deliver.” 他們一度承諾提供更多或更快的疫苗，但最終他們無法交付。

Some Governments Are Profiting  一些政府大賺其錢

Early in the pandemic, the European Investment Bank, the lending arm of the European Union, provided a $100 million loan to the German company BioNTech, which partnered with Pfizer in producing a vaccine. 在大流行初期，歐盟的貸款機構歐洲投資銀行向德國公司 BioNTech 提供了 1 億美元的貸款，該公司與輝瑞公司合作生產疫苗。

In addition to the interest on the loan, the European bank will receive up to $25 million in vaccine profits, according to a redacted version of the contract that BioNTech filed with securities regulators. 根據 BioNTech 向證券監管機構提交的契約修訂版，除了貸款利息外，這家歐洲銀行還將獲得高達 2500 萬美元的疫苗利潤。

The bank said profit-sharing arrangements reflect the risk involved in early financing. Mr. Rizvi, of Public Citizen, argued that it puts governments on the same side as the drug makers and reduces any incentive to make drugs cheap and widely available. 該銀行表示，利潤分享安排反映了早期融資所涉及的風險。 Public Citizen 的 Rizvi 先生辯稱，它使政府與製藥商站在同一邊，並減少了使藥物變得便宜和廣泛可用的任何動機。

Companies Get Liability Protection  公司獲得責任保護

In the United States, drug companies are shielded from nearly all liability if their vaccines don’t work or cause serious side effects. The government covered Covid-19 drug makers under the PREP Act, a 2005 law intended to speed up access to medicine during health emergencies. 在美國，如果他們的疫苗不起作用或導致嚴重的副作用，製藥公司幾乎免於承擔所有責任。政府根據 PREP 法案涵蓋 Covid-19 製藥商，這是 2005 年的一項法律，旨在加快在突發衛生事件期間獲得藥品的速度。

That means that people cannot sue the companies, even in cases of negligence or recklessness. The only exceptions are cases of proven, “willful misconduct.” 這意味著人們不能起訴這些公司，即使是在疏忽或魯莽的情況下。唯一的例外是經證實的“故意不當行為”。

Drug companies are seeking similar liability waivers in negotiations with other countries. European negotiators have balked at such requests. Covax also insists that countries accept all liability as part of its contracts.  在與其他國家的談判中，製藥公司正在尋求類似的責任豁免。 歐洲談判代表對這樣的要求猶豫不決。 Covax 還堅持認為，各國接受所有責任作為其合同的一部分。

The CureVac-E.U. contract does shield the company from significant liability, but with exceptions. Those exceptions are redacted. CureVac-E.U. 契約確實使公司免於承擔重大責任，但有例外。 這些例外也被塗黑。

Monika Pronczuk contributed reporting.