Daniel Carpenter: evaluation

Transcript context

…— back and forth on who should take it — below 60, above 60. No, again, AstraZeneca has had credibility issues all along. The idea that vaccine hesitancy is just some regulatory construct or some byproduct, I think is number one, demonstrably false, and number two, it misses the big problem that corporate reputation matters. AstraZeneca — I could grant that, yes, maybe we should roll AstraZeneca out there. About the thousands of lives counterfactual, I’m going to disagree because it’s not clear to me — and you might see this problem with Johnson & Johnson — I clearly see it in a lot of conversations. It’d be interesting to see survey data about whether people trust certain brands more than others. Part of it is vaccine nationalism. The French don’t trust the British. The British trust what’s endorsed by their National Health Service, but also their own company far more, things like that. Look, it’s the same AstraZeneca company. The British saved many thousands of lives by being prompt with AstraZeneca. Surely, we don’t think that is a mistake. We’ve had a supply constraint on the vaccine side in the United States, maybe up until now. We could have done the same, had we approved AstraZeneca. The company made big mistakes, but why penalize the people who can get the vaccine for that when, again, you could save thousands of lives? I just don’t get it.…

Stored transcript either side of the excerpt. The highlighted words are the published quote; the surrounding text is unedited source, never generated.