In regards to your last point - have a look at the Atlantic's gloat article on J&J. It's enough to make your stomach turn. This is the narrative they're going with, for whatever reason.
I suspect that reason is $. AD26 is "cheaper" to make because they have the facilities en masse. mRNA is something they can charge a premium for.
If people like the Atlantic are gloatpushing it, its usually because $ has exchanged hands.
I don't like Pfizer's extremely aggressive practices when it comes to suppressing studies and influencing. They've spent a lot of money influencing a lot of other markets, suppressing studies and buying journalists/influencers - at great cost to not only customers, but science itself. Not only that, they've used $ and influence to cover up issues with their products - issues resulting in injury and death.
It's not a scientific metric to judge them on, no, but it's a a very reliable observational/psychological one. Behavior you get away with, is behavior you repeat.
In regards to your last point - have a look at the Atlantic's gloat article on J&J. It's enough to make your stomach turn. This is the narrative they're going with, for whatever reason.
I suspect that reason is $. AD26 is "cheaper" to make because they have the facilities en masse. mRNA is something they can charge a premium for. If people like the Atlantic are gloatpushing it, its usually because $ has exchanged hands.
I don't like Pfizer's extremely aggressive practices when it comes to suppressing studies and influencing. They've spent a lot of money influencing a lot of other markets, suppressing studies and buying journalists/influencers - at great cost to not only customers, but science itself. Not only that, they've used $ and influence to cover up issues with their products - issues resulting in injury and death.
It's not a scientific metric to judge them on, no, but it's a a very reliable observational/psychological one. Behavior you get away with, is behavior you repeat.