As controversy over the fast-tracking of a potential Covid-19 vaccine rages on, CPI(M) General Secretary Sitaram Yechury on Saturday accused the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) of forcing medical institutions and hospitals to fast-track production of the indigenous vaccine to enable Prime Minister Narendra Modi make an announcement on Independence Day.
Read: ICMR aims to launch indigenous Covid-19 vaccine by August 15
In a series of tweets, Yechury said the world is waiting for a safe vaccine, which is universally accessible, but scientific advances "can never be made to order".
"Forcing the development of an indigenous vaccine as a cure for Covid-19, bypassing all health and safety norms, to be announced by PM Modi on Independence Day is fraught with horrendous human costs," he said.
The ICMR On Friday wrote to medical institutions to fast-track clinical trial approvals for the Covid-19 vaccine candidate Covaxin, being developed in collaboration with Bharat Biotech which it plans to release on August 15. The letter raised concerns among scientific and medical communities.
Also Read: Short timeline for India Covid-19 vaccine test raises doubts among health experts
"Kindly note non-compliance will be viewed very seriously. Therefore, you are advised to treat this project on highest priority and meet the given timelines without any lapse," the ICMR letter said.
Yechury asked, "Why is ICMR using threats to get institutions to fall in line? Some of the institutions like NIMS in Hyderabad are state government institutions. Has permission been given by the Government of Telangana?"
Emphasising that "some serious questions" need to be answered, he asked how the ICMR can decide on the vaccine launch date without regulator body Drug Controller General of India (DCGI) evaluating evidence of safety and efficacy.
Follow live updates on the coronavirus here
"What liability is ICMR assuming in aggressively pushing the trial of a vaccine produced by a private company? How can ICMR compel institutions to start trials without giving time to their Institutional Ethics Committees to examine the trial protocol, consent procedures and liability?" he demanded.
Questioning the selection process of institutions for trial, he claimed three of them are private institutions, including a private practitioner who "has no institutional address."
"What is the number of people who will be studied in this trial? Will phase 1, 2 and 3 trials be completed and analysed by August 14? Who are the members of the independent Data Safety Monitoring Committee (DSMC)?" Yechury asked.