by A. Shaw

The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that two vaccines — which many observers think are improbably chosen as a system of immunization against the Ebola virus – will be ready by the end of March 2015.
The first of the two vaccines, cAd3-ZEBOV, was developed by GlaxoSmithKline in collaboration with the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID). The second, rVSV-ZEBOV, was developed by the Canadian Agency for Public Health.
WHO doesn’t say whether cAd3-ZEBOV and rVSV-ZEBOV have proven in experimental research to be the least or most successful vaccines in treating Ebola.
In the USA, a number of US citizens who are health care workers have been given a vaccine for Ebola and the condition of these infected US workers improved. Thomas Eric Duncan, an Ebola-infected Liberian citizen who travelled to Dallas, TX, was given a different “vaccine” and he died.
 Why was there such a dramatic difference in the results? Why did the US citizens improve and Duncan die?
US drug companies own patents on drugs that are most successful in fighting Ebola.
Neither cAd3-ZEBOV nor  rVSV-ZEBOV is subject to patents own by US drug companies. So,  cAd3-ZEBOV and  rVSV-ZEBOV can be administered to Ebola patients in West Africa without permission from US drug companies.
[By the way, a patent is an exclusive right to produce or sell an invention or new product — like an Ebola drug – for a certain time.]
But will  cAd3-ZEBOV and  rVSV-ZEBOV do any good in West Africa? Are they the least successful of a dozen possible vaccines?
WHO will not oppose US drug companies withholding the best drugs.
As one possibility for a score, the political implications and opportunities of what has been said above should be clear to Sanders.
What may not be clear is Sanders blew a big opportunity to score when Sanders was silent while Obama was dilatory in March-April 2014, about the US response to Ebola, Obama allowed Ebola to get out of control. Sanders announced his preparedness to run for the White House in the March 6, 2014 edition of The Nation magazine. So, Sanders could have scored if he were disposed.
This is now water under the bridge.
Now, the important thing is not to blow any additional opportunities to score on Ebola or on numerous other issues.