Health-tech
3 minute read
An interesting side effect of COVID has been its catalytic effect – accelerating the existing global mega trends. Many companies and workers are experiencing the benefits of flexible working arrangements and video conferencing8,9 sooner than they would have without a lockdown; city dwellers are enjoying cleaner air and less congested roads13; there is a flood of new customers towards e-commerce9 and companies are innovating and learning to build flexible and resilient supply chains8,9,12. Perhaps nowhere has this acceleration effect taken hold more than in Health-tech. Necessity is the mother of invention and the rise of telemedicine during this crisis has been a prime example. In the early days in locked down Wuhan, demand for existing but subscale video-consultation and prescription delivery services skyrocketed. Last year in the UK only 14% of GP consultations were over the phone and 0.6% were online. Since March, only 7-8% have been in person.
Work to develop a vaccine has progressed at breakneck speed across the globe with a number already in clinical trials – a point that can take years to reach under normal circumstances. Again, I’ll refrain from quoting too many stats here as the area is moving so quickly that any figures will inevitably be out of date the moment I send this out, but there are thought to be at least 150 candidate vaccines in development across the globe using a vast array of technologies and techniques. Clearly not all will reach efficacy and the required safety standards but having such a healthy competitive environment can only be a good thing in identifying, testing and approving a few successful ones. One. Of the earliest candidates was produced in January without the researchers even having access to a sample of SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19). They downloaded the virus genome that Chinese scientists had published online and used it to synthesise specific SARS-CoV-2 genes and splice them into a different type of virus.
The turbo charged processes that the scientists have developed to research, produce, test and scale up these will be one of the few positive by-products of the pandemic3,9. Others are the AI algorithms and big data techniques researchers are using to identify existing drugs which could be effective; and the collaboration we are seeing from Big Pharma companies (like Sanofi and GSK) with each other and with various academic institutions and smaller biotech companies and commercial laboratories9. The scale and production capabilities of the world’s largest pharmaceutical firms is going to be vital to supplying enough of the vaccines that come out on top and we are already seeing them committing to share intellectual property and pledge to price the end product at cost, all in the interests of humanity (a nice bit of good PR for a change).
Once we have the vaccines it begins to get really tricky. The 7.8 billion dollar question is of course how do you decide who gets it first? Rich countries who will have (probably) funded most of the research and development? Poor countries with weak healthcare systems which are most likely to be overwhelmed by future outbreaks? Front Line workers who are most at risk of catching and spreading the disease? The elderly and those with underlying health conditions who are at the greatest risk of mortality? It’s the prisoner’s dilemma just as with the initial lockdown responses. Countries are incentivised to act selfishly and stockpile vaccines for their own citizens, but do this and everyone is worse off. None of us are safe unless we are all safe. A coordinated intentional approach on this is perhaps even more important than it was for the initial lockdown responses. This is where supranational institutions, like the UN and the WHO; philanthropic foundations like the Gates Foundation; and NGOs like CEPI and GAVI must be allowed to take the lead – especially if the cooperation we’ve seen from world leaders this far is anything to go by16.