Big Pharma deserves its reward for coming up with Covid-19 vaccines
Calls to restrain drug companies' profits from making Covid-19 vaccines are misplaced and would do more harm than good, says Matthew Lynn
Get the latest financial news, insights and expert analysis from our award-winning MoneyWeek team, to help you understand what really matters when it comes to your finances.
You are now subscribed
Your newsletter sign-up was successful
Want to add more newsletters?
Twice daily
MoneyWeek
Get the latest financial news, insights and expert analysis from our award-winning MoneyWeek team, to help you understand what really matters when it comes to your finances.
Four times a week
Look After My Bills
Sign up to our free money-saving newsletter, filled with the latest news and expert advice to help you find the best tips and deals for managing your bills. Start saving today!
It turns out that Covid-19 vaccines are like the old joke about buses. You wait for ages and then three turn up at the same time. Over the last month, we have seen stunning results from Pfizer, Moderna and Oxford-AstraZeneca. Each vaccine is slightly different, in terms of effectiveness, and how quickly it can be rolled out, but there is now no question that we are close to a mass vaccination programme that should bring the virus under control. Six months ago plenty of experts were arguing it would take five years or more to get a working shot. In fact, it has been done in less than a year.
Don’t throw sand in the wheels
But there’s a problem. Now that we are close to a vaccine, the arguments are starting about who gets it, when, and on what terms. There are complaints about the potential for the drugs companies to make excess profits. And countries such as South Africa and India are calling on the World Health Organisation to suspend patent protection on the vaccines so that they can be manufactured by anyone at cost.
It is easy to understand the arguments for that. A Covid-19 vaccine is needed around the world, and some countries might struggle to afford it. It doesn’t make any sense just to vaccinate the richer countries. If the virus is still rampant around the world it will just come back in more virulent forms. The trouble is, suspending patents, and stopping drug companies from making money from the vaccine, would be a disaster, not just for the shareholders in those businesses, but for the whole world.
MoneyWeek
Subscribe to MoneyWeek today and get your first six magazine issues absolutely FREE
Sign up to Money Morning
Don't miss the latest investment and personal finances news, market analysis, plus money-saving tips with our free twice-daily newsletter
Don't miss the latest investment and personal finances news, market analysis, plus money-saving tips with our free twice-daily newsletter
Why? Getting a vaccine in less than a year is a huge achievement, and one that has cost vast sums of money, much of it privately funded. If the only reward for that is to have the patent rights taken away, then will the companies make the same kind of effort the next time there is a global epidemic?
Second, some exciting new technologies are emerging. The genetics-based vaccines that seem to be working against Covid-19 can not only be developed far more quickly than traditional shots but may also work against many other conditions as well. We already have vaccines that can work against some form of cancers. Over the next decade the technology that has advanced at rapid speed in this crisis may well turn out to be just as good at dealing with other forms of cancer, dementia, Alzheimer’s, and a whole range of hard-to-treat diseases. But if we don’t allow companies patent protection on the technologies they are developing, then that is far less likely to happen – and we will all be worse off for that.
Whatever the profits, it’s a bargain
Finally, it is immoral. Private companies have done the work on a vaccine, they have risked their own money, and they have devoted time and resources to solving a global crisis. They deserve to be rewarded for that. So do their shareholders. If we start taking one form of property away from companies, then where do we stop? In truth, we should probably reward vaccine makers more than we are right now – for example by extending the patent protection from 20 to 30 years. Given the vast cost of the epidemic in terms of locked-down economies, closed businesses and schools, lost jobs, and broken families, if anything we are paying too little for the science that will get us out of the mess, not too much.
There are far better ways of dealing with the issue of global access. The sums of money are not huge, especially when set against the scale of the challenge. Take a relatively poor country such as South Africa, with one of the worst outbreaks on the continent. Even with Moderna’s vaccine, at £30 a shot, the most expensive so far, it would only cost £1.5bn to vaccinate the entire country. If the government can’t raise that, then aid budgets, and charities, could probably step in and fill the gap. If the poorest 20% of the global population needs help paying for the vaccine, then the G20, representing the richest countries in the world, could easily step in with an emergency funding programme. That way we still get the vaccine out around the world, and we also properly reward the companies that made it.
Get the latest financial news, insights and expert analysis from our award-winning MoneyWeek team, to help you understand what really matters when it comes to your finances.

Matthew Lynn is a columnist for Bloomberg and writes weekly commentary syndicated in papers such as the Daily Telegraph, Die Welt, the Sydney Morning Herald, the South China Morning Post and the Miami Herald. He is also an associate editor of Spectator Business, and a regular contributor to The Spectator. Before that, he worked for the business section of the Sunday Times for ten years.
-
ISA fund and trust picks for every type of investor – which could work for you?Whether you’re an ISA investor seeking reliable returns, looking to add a bit more risk to your portfolio or are new to investing, MoneyWeek asked the experts for funds and investment trusts you could consider in 2026
-
The most popular fund sectors of 2025 as investor outflows continueIt was another difficult year for fund inflows but there are signs that investors are returning to the financial markets
-
Three companies with deep economic moats to buy nowOpinion An economic moat can underpin a company's future returns. Here, Imran Sattar, portfolio manager at Edinburgh Investment Trust, selects three stocks to buy now
-
Should you sell your Affirm stock?Affirm, a buy-now-pay-later lender, is vulnerable to a downturn. Investors are losing their enthusiasm, says Matthew Partridge
-
Why it might be time to switch your pension strategyYour pension strategy may need tweaking – with many pension experts now arguing that 75 should be the pivotal age in your retirement planning.
-
Beeks – building the infrastructure behind global marketsBeeks Financial Cloud has carved out a lucrative global niche in financial plumbing with smart strategies, says Jamie Ward
-
Saba Capital: the hedge fund doing wonders for shareholder democracyActivist hedge fund Saba Capital isn’t popular, but it has ignited a new age of shareholder engagement, says Rupert Hargreaves
-
Silver has seen a record streak – will it continue?Opinion The outlook for silver remains bullish despite recent huge price rises, says ByteTree’s Charlie Morris
-
Investing in space – finding profits at the final frontierGetting into space has never been cheaper thanks to private firms and reusable technology. That has sparked something of a gold rush in related industries, says Matthew Partridge
-
Star fund managers – an investing style that’s out of fashionStar fund managers such as Terry Smith and Nick Train are at the mercy of wider market trends, says Cris Sholto Heaton