Photo: REUTERS file
business

Takeda to import 50 million doses of Moderna's COVID-19 vaccine

29 Comments

Takeda Pharmaceutical Co said on Thursday it would import and distribute 50 million doses of Moderna Inc's novel coronavirus vaccine candidate.

Takeda will be responsible for securing regulatory approval for the vaccine, known as mRNA-1273, with supply starting in the first half of 2021, Takeda said in a release.

The companies were previously in talks to supply 40 million or more doses of the vaccine in Japan.

Moderna's candidate is in late-stage trials in the United States. Takeda has also agreed to produce Novavax Inc's novel coronavirus vaccine, aiming to make 250 million doses for use in Japan.

The announcement came on the heels of Takeda's mid-year results, which saw it raise its full-year operating profit forecast by 10% to 434 billion yen, citing one-time gains from divestitures.

© Thomson Reuters 2020.

©2020 GPlusMedia Inc.

29 Comments
Login to comment

Will they take responsibility for any adverse side effects of this rushed vaccine? Oh that’s right the have zero liability indemnity don’t they !

-6 ( +9 / -15 )

 zero liability indemnity don’t they !

Well no that is not the case

The Japanese government on Tuesday approved a bill to pay all the costs of administrating a vaccine against the novel coronavirus to all residents and to compensate suppliers in the event any serious side effects occur.

https://japantoday.com/category/national/japan-gov't-oks-bill-to-offer-free-coronavirus-vaccines

11 ( +12 / -1 )

No, no, and no this too rushed for anyone to be resonably assured of its safety.

-7 ( +5 / -12 )

Will they take responsibility for any adverse side effects of this rushed vaccine?

The company will take responsibility for securing regulatory approval, that means they will be held responsible to prove to the government that the vaccine is as safe and effective as required.

Oh that’s right the have zero liability indemnity don’t they !

No, that is completely false, the companies are liable if their products are not up to the standards required by the government, that is why every single lot of a vaccine is tested by the government for safety and efficacy, and any company that is delivering a substandard product can be punished.

No, no, and no this too rushed for anyone to be resonably assured of its safety.

If this were put to sale today it would be, but a 6 months phase III trials is normal and has been done with other vaccines that are in use right now. Anything that reaches the public after being approved next year cannot be said to be rushed, and its safety can be proved to realistic standards to be much less risky than the natural infection.

6 ( +10 / -4 )

I am not a candidate, but at least, Japan Inc is moving on that issue

5 ( +6 / -1 )

No, that is completely false, the companies are liable if their products are not up to the standards required by the government, that is why every single lot of a vaccine is tested by the government for safety and efficacy,

Yeah, remdisivir and avigan spring to mind, the government spent 135M USD for Avigan before it was even tested and was heavily and you still expect stringent screening standards will be maintained, I have a tower mansion in Roppongi to sell.

-5 ( +3 / -8 )

@kyushubill

No, no, and no this too rushed for anyone to be resonably assured of its safety.

mRNA vaccines are safe, this is why they are being approved first because they didn't have any show stoppers during trials, unlike traditional adenovirus based vaccines.

The issues with mRNA vaccines is the difficulty of distribution, not safety or efficacy.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

and you still expect stringent screening standards will be maintained, 

Completely unrelated things,

First, you need to invest money precisely to investigate a drug, that is what it is supposed to happen, Testing is not something that just happens for free. It is very common for the government to support promising drugs or other technologies that would support public health, most research grants in medicine are just that.

Second, there is absolutely nothing to prevent stringent screening being performed by scientists, doctors, officials, etc. They don't get any money from either of the companies and their reports actually exculpate the government from any wrong doing. The government best interests are to have a working and safe vaccine, or in a second place to not put their hands on the fire for something they know will bring problems. And that is without even considering that literally dozens and dozens of people would find out about problems and would keep quiet knowing their friends and families would be exposed without

6 ( +10 / -4 )

Another money wasting.Untested and unconfirmed "medicine"?

Who will take risks of side effects etc?Who will guarantee that it will help to ones who may be in need of help?

Answer is simple-no guarantee for anything.Just another fat profit business.

-7 ( +3 / -10 )

This is not even necessary, so why waste enormous amounts of taxpayers' money on so many vaccinations when this virus is not even dangerous to the vast majority of us?

To illustrate, I was listening this morning to an interview with Dr Mike Yeadon, who is the former CSO and VP of Allergy Respiratory Research at Pfizer.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5y51GICqL9E

At around the 30:00 mark they start talking about vaccination. He made it clear that he "is pro well-characterised vaccines - they absolutely prevent illness and death." So we can establish his position and there's no room to smear him as an anti-vaxxer.

He goes on to say:

"But, in the case of something like SARS-CoV-2, it kills 1 in 500 people or so, average age 83. I think it would be great if we had a vaccine for people like that. It might give them a few more months of life - not much more. The reason you die having caught it is not because you have SARS-CoV-2, it's because you have a respiratory virus. Almost any of them will kill you at that age. Even a serious cold will kill you.

"So it would be good to have a vaccine for very vulnerable people. But - and this is a really important but - nobody else really needs this thing.... You don't vaccinate the population because 1 in million might have a bad outcome. You look at people who are vulnerable and offer them a vaccine, with the word offer - informed consent is important."

"So it's not necessary, and it's an appalling misuse of a public platform for people to suggest that the only way we'l get our lives back is if we mass-vaccinate the population. Something very smelly is going on. It's simply not appropriate and it's never been required, and I don't think it would work"

He continues, but have a listen for yourselves.

Basically, if you want to take a vaccine, go ahead. But there's no need to mass-vaccinate the population against it, and to do so would be morally abhorrent.

-14 ( +2 / -16 )

This is not even necessary, so why waste enormous amounts of taxpayers' money on so many vaccinations when this virus is not even dangerous to the vast majority of us?

Because the vaccine is even less dangerous than the infection, and would let people resume normal lives and economic activities with much more safety, without the risk of suffering long lasting health problems or even death that can happen even to young healthy individuals, and also because it would make much more easier to protect the population that is in much higher risk.

He made it clear that he "is pro well-characterised vaccines - they absolutely prevent illness and death." So we can establish his position and there's no room to smear him as an anti-vaxxer.

How one person represent himself and how their actions reveal how they are can be different, a person can say he is not a liar, but then do exactly what he said he would not do, his actions would prove him a liar above what he says about himself.

He made absolutely no effort to explain why so much people died from COVID-19 if it should be considered as a respiratory virus, nor the increased morbidity from people that got symptomatic and later presented serious health problems. Even just epidemiological data can prove him wrong, and he presents no data to contradict every single professional association of health workers of the world, just his personal opinion that can be proved wrong.

If the vaccine reduces the risk for an specific person that vaccine is desirable and necessary according to public health standards, you could have one in 10,000 chances of dying of COVID-19 but if the vaccine reduces this to one in a million that vaccine is still a much better option for anybody rational.

If the vaccine is able to also reduce the chances for you to pass the disease to the people that have one in a hundred chances of dying, that is an even more powerful reason. Something that Dr Yeadon choose very carefully to ignore, as if it were not important, it is.

Basically, if you want to take a vaccine, go ahead. But there's no need to mass-vaccinate the population against it, and to do so would be morally abhorrent.

On the contrary, there is every need to vaccinate as much people as possible, not only to protect efficiently the population at higher risk, but also because the pandemic is not a well caracterizad disease and several long term risks have been identified, a vaccine is very likely to reduce those risks. Ignoring those risks or leaving the population to live in the only other way to prevent widespread contagion (limiting a lot of activities) is the one that is morally inexcusable.

Vaccines are not made to protect perfectly one person being vaccinated, they are made to offer protection at the least amount possible of risks, so if the community in general is vaccinated the diseases stops spreading. But if you vaccinate only a small segment of the population the sacrifice in efficacy to achieve extremely high safety means the vulnerable population would still be at risk.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

One the one hand we have direct quotes from an identified industry professional who has reached the upper echelons of the pharmaceutical industry, versus the postings of an unidentified individual who won't clearly state whether or not he/she is a practicing scientist but who pushes the mass-vaccination line at every opportunity and attempts to smear people who disagree with him/her.

The huge difference is that I do not base any of my comments on my supposed authority, that is a strawman used to avoid the real confrontation, between one single person, without data, that pushes many conspiracy based theories that require ignoring very important details one side and on the other not me, but every single professional association of health workers of the world, that say that Dr Yeadon is not justified at all on his judgment, not when he says that vaccines are irrelevant for most people, not when he says that all detection tests are fakes and no second wave happened.

If for you pointing out obvious flaws on his theories (such as ignoring the huge importance of transmission of a disease as a valid justification for vaccination) means smearing I am very sorry but that is simply poiting out where he is wrong.

Again, I never used any personal opinion as a basis for my posts, I just echo what the real professionals that work for the health of the population do and say openly. The scientific consensus is clear, your source is not justified in his judgement, and it can be easily proved wrong. This virus is not just another respiratory virus, people with productive decades to live have died unnecessarily, and a vaccine can ease this burden reducing risks and protecting even healthy young adults.

And again, I have on my favor that I have not said I would never do something again just to do it anyway, that at least shows that I take care of not lying.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

Because the vaccine is even less dangerous than the infection,

We don't know that yet. Of course, if someone denies all associations between vaccines and their side effects, you could say that.

Anyway, the vaccine is nowhere close to as deadly as initially claimed, especially for healthy people below 70; Covid19 has pretty much run its course, many of us are likely already immune to it, and we have quite effective treatments for it.

So the vaccine is not needed. But if someone wants to risk it, be my guest. I just wish tax payers would not pay for the vaccines and the compensations...

BTW, how long was the Korean flu vaccine tested, the one that killed 59 Koreans (probably more by now)?

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

Virusrex, have you actually listened to the whole interview? If not, why not? Do so before casting aspersions.

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

Anyway, the vaccine is nowhere close to as deadly as initially claimed,

Oooops!

I meant "Anyway, the virus is nowhere close to as deadly as initially claimed"

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

Because the vaccine is even less dangerous than the infection, and would let people resume normal lives and economic activities with much more safety, without the risk of suffering long lasting health problems or even death that can happen even to young healthy individuals, and also because it would make much more easier to protect the population that is in much higher risk.

Virusrex, the flu kills tens of thousands of people if not more around the world every year, so why no push for mass vaccination and lockdowns for that? After all, the flu vaccine is less dangerous than the disease, right? By that logic you should be pushing for mass flu vaccinations, social distancing, masks and lockdowns to "protect the vulnerable." Can't have it both ways. Your logic is flawed.

How one person represent himself and how their actions reveal how they are can be different, a person can say he is not a liar, but then do exactly what he said he would not do, his actions would prove him a liar above what he says about himself.

He made absolutely no effort to explain why so much people died from COVID-19 if it should be considered as a respiratory virus, nor the increased morbidity from people that got symptomatic and later presented serious health problems. Even just epidemiological data can prove him wrong, and he presents no data to contradict every single professional association of health workers of the world, just his personal opinion that can be proved wrong.

Given that it's unlikely you have even watched the whole interview, you don't know what else he has said. I only transcribed a small part of it. So you're just smearing.

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

We don't know that yet. Of course, if someone denies all associations between vaccines and their side effects, you could say that.

No, in general all vaccines currently in use share that necessary condition, and in particular, any vaccine approved for use in the general population in the free world have this absolute requirement. There is no realistic chance that a vaccine that is not less dangerous than the infection will be approved after the Phase III trials.

Anyway, the virus is nowhere close to as deadly as initially claimed"

And any vaccine validly approved would make it even less deadly, that is not an argument, specially because the disease is still deadly, to people that could have been expected to live productive lives for years to come, people that are not to be discarded as just as sacrifice for the economy.

So the vaccine is not needed. But if someone wants to risk it, be my guest. I just wish tax payers would not pay for the vaccines and the compensations...

The opposite is true, from a public health point of view the vaccine is needed, but if anyone wants to reject it, even for invalid or irrational reasons, this person is perfectly allowed to do it.

BTW, how long was the Korean flu vaccine tested, the one that killed 59 Koreans (probably more by now)?

That is false, people die after being vaccinated, because the vaccine do not prevent every single cause of death, only importantly lowers the risks of the infection they are meant to prevent. At this point it has become clear that most, if not all, of the deaths are not consequence of being vaccinated. I have already corrected you on this two days ago in the news about the Japanese government making the vaccines free, what would be the reason on repeating something that is mistaken?

Virusrex, have you actually listened to the whole interview? If not, why not? Do so before casting aspersions

In no part of the interview nobody refutes any of my arguments, there is no data presented, no analysis to justify conclusions different from the consensus, no mention of the importance of preventing transmission with a vaccine, Dr Yeadon has never justified his mistaken assumptions about coronavirus testing. You could listen 20 times to the interview and no counterargument for any of this could be found. Just the personal, unfounded opinion of someone that says the health professionals of the world are wrong, and only he is right.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

In no part of the interview nobody refutes any of my arguments, there is no data presented, no analysis to justify conclusions different from the consensus, no mention of the importance of preventing transmission with a vaccine, Dr Yeadon has never justified his mistaken assumptions about coronavirus testing. You could listen 20 times to the interview and no counterargument for any of this could be found. Just the personal, unfounded opinion of someone that says the health professionals of the world are wrong, and only he is right.

A simple yes or no: have you listened to the entire interview?

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

Virusrex, the flu kills tens of thousands of people if not more around the world every year, so why no push for mass vaccination and lockdowns for that?

There are very strong efforts to promote vaccination against influenza, even when the disease is a much more complicated one to control with a vaccine. Lockdowns are not implemented because, as every person informed on the realities of the pandemic would know, COVID-19 is much more dangerous than the seasonal influenza. Death rates, hospitalization rates, ICU use, frequency of sequelae and increased risks that we are just finding out about are the ones that justify much stronger measures for this disease.

Another reason is that for influenza we already have vaccines that according to the year go from just good to excellent. Vaccines are a much less resource consuming measures compared with lockdowns and that is why people that have been affected by them strongly desire the development of a safe and effective vaccine, so COVID-19 can be treated as the flu.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

What's up with the news of Japanese companies manufacturing and inventing their own vaccines?

Apparently, it never becomes the realm of possibility with the gradually declining R&D base in Japan due to the future generational lack of interests and the lack of fundings.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

First, you need to invest money precisely to investigate a drug, that is what it is supposed to happen, Testing is not something that just happens for free. It is very common for the government to support promising drugs or other technologies that would support public health, most research grants in medicine are just that.

Second, there is absolutely nothing to prevent stringent screening being performed by scientists, doctors, officials, etc. They don't get any money from either of the companies and their reports actually exculpate the government from any wrong doing. The government best interests are to have a working and safe vaccine, or in a second place to not put their hands on the fire for something they know will bring problems. And that is without even considering that literally dozens and dozens of people would find out about problems and would keep quiet knowing their friends and families would be exposed without

I won't spend precious time debunking all of what you wrote above, what you are insinuating is the ideal but in this real world that we live in, the ideal is far from reality, in every gov't there are people with special interest that stand to gain at the expense of the masses, Just because the gov't says doesn't mean it is right, don't forget they have the tools, power to pass their narrative.

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

There are very strong efforts to promote vaccination against influenza, even when the disease is a much more complicated one to control with a vaccine. 

Yes, but there's none of this sky-is-falling manufactured paranoia about different flu strains, even thought they mutate every year. Reasonably effective vaccines are made - I think my parents get them - and that's fine. But there's no cure. We have learned to live with flu viruses. And it's far more common for influenza to strike across a wide variety of age groups, whereas the vast majority of COVID-19 sufferers are elderly and already have weakened immune systems.

Once again, if people voluntarily want to get a SARS-CoV-19 vaccine if and when one becomes available, I don't have a problem with that. My problem is with mass vaccination either by mandate or de facto mandate (ie, no travel, school, job, etc. without it). I agree with Dr Yeadon and thousands of other medical professionals that it's simply not necessary to vaccinate everyone regardless of whether they want it or not.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

Takeda to import 50 million doses of Moderna's COVID-19 vaccine - which does not exist yet.

In other words - Japan's throwing our money at Trump's imaginary "Operation Warp Speed"

https://www.hhs.gov/about/news/2020/08/11/trump-administration-collaborates-with-moderna-produce-100-million-doses-covid-19-investigational-vaccine.html

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

A simple yes or no: have you listened to the entire interview?

She hasn't. Let it go. Some people are not open to hearing differing opinions, they just want to push their talking points.

It doesn't matter what their qualifications are, if they go against big pharma, the name will be Googled and whatever hit-piece comes up will be copy-pasted. Such as Judy Mikovits, Luc Montagnier (Nobel prize for his work on HIV)...

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

A simple yes or no: have you listened to the entire interview?

Why is so difficult to believe for you? it takes no time, he is (in)famous for his lax approach to evidence and his liking of unsubstantiated claims that end up false, its very simple to listen and understand he is just doing the same again, you can skip a few seconds from every answer he has already given and it takes no time to see he is not presenting any evidence of what he says, just his opinion.

You don't think so? sure, point out where did he presented his evidence, his analysis, his methods to be checked. That would be the one that takes time, because primary sources as in scientific writing would require some effort to analyze and corroborate. Just saying things without evidence is easy to do, and even easier to hear and discard.

What's up with the news of Japanese companies manufacturing and inventing their own vaccines?

Unfortunately Japan is no longer the World Class level research nation it was in the past, at this point is mostly running behind USA and Europe for almost everything health related. There are quite interesting candidates coming up in the pipeline from Japanese institutes and universities, but the support from the government came too short and too late to make a difference.

I won't spend precious time debunking all of what you wrote above, what you are insinuating is the ideal but in this real world that we live in, the ideal is far from reality,

No it is not, there is nothing idealistic from expecting at least a few of the literally dozens of people involved in testing every lot of a vaccine to give more importance to the lives and health of their family members and friends that would be using that vaccine. It is just human nature. Having a few rotten apples is not enough to let any company sell a faulty product without consequences. If that were the case Japan would have only bad vaccines causing thousands of deaths every year, something that of course don't happen.

And Moderator, stop deleting posts that seriously question virusrex's credibility. They are not off-topic. Grow a spine.

But that is the point, they are all off-topic, I can repeat it as much as you like, I never post things based on my credibility, Even if I did something to destroy my credibility, like saying I would not reply to you ever again just to do it anyway (proving myself a huge liar). it would not matter and still every single one of my arguments would be valid, because none depend on anybody believing me, it is all open information that can be easily confirmed by yourself.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Yes, but there's none of this sky-is-falling manufactured paranoia about different flu strains, even thought they mutate every year. 

Again, because the seasonal flu is much milder and less dangerous compared with the COVID-19, as easily as comparing the number of deaths because of the flu and because COVID-19 this year. And because we have vaccines to fight it. It is much easier to live with the flu, because it is much less dangerous.

There is no possibility of forced vaccination against COVID-19, at least not to the degree above what we have with the current vaccines (not being able to work in a nursing home without the influenza vaccine, or not being able to travel to some countries without a vaccine for some specific disease). For most things you would only need to show you are immune, not vaccinated.

Dr Yeadon lacks credibility, has been proved wrong repeatedly, makes no effort to defend his opinion against scientific data, but you can agree with him if that is what you look for in a role model. The same as your previous sources, which had very strong conflict of interest problems that you choose to ignore.

Also, every health care professional agrees that vaccinations against the will of the people are not justified, that is just an strawman, the real argument is that mass vaccination are a safe and effective health measure to protect against infections diseases, and a perfectly logical and rational thing to do,

It doesn't matter what their qualifications are, if they go against big pharma, the name will be Googled and whatever hit-piece comes up will be copy-pasted. Such as Judy Mikovits, Luc Montagnier (Nobel prize for his work on HIV)

There has never been a need to do it, their deeply antiscientific views that can easily be demonstrated as false are enough to destroy their credibility. Just by repeating what they believe and how the evidence contradict them is enough.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Covid19 has pretty much run its course, many of us are likely already immune to it,

You’ve got to back this one up.

This is a huge, game-changing claim.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

Covid19 has pretty much run its course, many of us are likely already immune to it,

You’ve got to back this one up.

This is a huge, game-changing claim.

Look around at the numbers. There appear to be some second waves (or ripples) in some areas in terms of cases (PCR positives), but not in deaths, except in areas that did not have a significant wave in spring.

I suspect that by the time the vaccine becomes available (if it ever does), it will be irrelevant.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

I watched the video. in my opinion Dr. Yeadon is correct about the mass testing nonsense. The world should follow Japan's model. Admissions and deaths only and not just PCR but also scanning

As for the new lockdown in Europe and UK I am not so sure, because the point behind is not to eradicate the virus but to maintain a functional health care system.

At this point it is hard to tell with a degree of certainty that we have reached herd immunity.

Mass vaccination however will 100% get us back on track, I think it will save lives, money it will give us good data and most importantly and immense amount of expertise for the future.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites