Because its Schrodinger's Vaccine. Somehow the FDA managed to approve a BLA for Cominarty by BioNTech, and send mail to Pfizer extending their EUA. And then the press release which is what most went with, only talks about the BLA approval. Clearly the press release is intended to muck the waters as much as possible.
Meanwhile buried only in the EUA extension letter is verbiage saying that the two vax's are legally distinct. Also, they acknowledge they have no stocks of Cominarty. So essentially this is all a bait-&-switch by the FDA to claim a BLA vax exists (i.e. FDA-approved), where none practically exists.
Given that theoretically the BLA Cominarty has less legal protections for Pfizer than the EUA vax, i highly doubt that Pfizer is likely to bring it to market. They gain all this legal protection back when they get BLA for the children's schedule, so I am guessing that is what they are waiting for.
Because its Schrodinger's Vaccine. Somehow the FDA managed to approve a BLA for Cominarty by BioNTech, and send mail to Pfizer extending their EUA. And then the press release which is what most went with, only talks about the BLA approval. Clearly the press release is intended to muck the waters as much as possible.
Meanwhile buried only in the EUA extension letter is verbiage saying that the two vax's are legally distinct. Also, they acknowledge they have no stocks of Cominarty. So essentially this is all a bait-&-switch by the FDA to claim a BLA vax exists (i.e. FDA-approved), where none practically exists.
Given that theoretically the BLA Cominarty has less legal protections for Pfizer than the EUA vax, i highly doubt that Pfizer is likely to bring it to market. They gain all this legal protection back when they get BLA for the children's schedule, so I am guessing that is what they are waiting for.