USA Population 333 million. If everyone in the USA got COVID and there was a 99.99% survival rate that would translate to 333,000 deaths. USA COVID deaths so far: 580,000, and certainly not everyone has gotten the virus. Your 99.99% survival rate is obviously inaccurate.
Those are not China virus deaths. They are any deaths of a person that tested positive for China virus within a month of the death many false positive tests is the problem. And also counting flu deaths as China virus deaths
My guess is the Article is inaccurate. I don't think anyone in a position of authority is talking about "suspending IP". Probably the suspension being considered is a suspension of IP fees, not IP itself! One has to assume, and with the present administration we've been given no reason not to, that this government is not going to do something that would on its face be ridiculous. The last paragraph of the article is certainly a gross overstatement, in any case. However the concern that advanced biotechnology might be transferred to nations where IP is not secure, along with the right to produce the mRNA vaccines, is a valid one. The way this should be handled, and I imagine it will be, is to produce all of the vaccines in western countries where patent protection is respected, and then ship the vaccines to underdeveloped countries allowing them access to the vaccine they need at low cost, subsidized jointly by the U.S. and U.S. Pharma. It's the right thing to do. We'll be making an even bigger mistake if we don't recognize the importance of facilitating, with help from our European and North American Partners, vaccination of the entire world. I imagine that this will in fact be how we do it, while still protecting valuable IP. We would be buying only time in any case, because eventually, of course, Countries like India, that badly need more vaccine now, will be able to develop mRNA vaccine technology on their own, as they have more advanced biotech capability already then many are aware of. Let's not be naive.
I have a bad feeling that what the administration means by "patent waiver" is being grossly misunderstood by some media, maybe intentionally in some instances. By the way, Carter was neither wimpy nor useless, but he was a Washington outsider whose effectiveness was harmed by that, and he was, at the same time, unlucky. Any comparison between Carter and Biden would be superficial. Biden is the consummate "insider", and he has appointed many highly competent insiders to key positions in his administration.
After wasting time to comment on the OP, I realized that the whole thing can be dismissed as an absurd political hit piece. If something is patented it is disclosed for the whole world to see, but that does not mean it would be easy necessarily for someone to put the patent into use. The IP disclosed in a patent is only protected in countries that are a party to international patent law and even then only in countries in which you have bothered to obtain a patent. Any additional protection comes from weak proprietary knowledge ancillary to the patent itself. Biden can not give away patented IP because it is already in the public domain. He certainly has no unilateral power to change patent law. The entire article is an absurdity. Any talk of a "patent waiver" would simply be concerning a waiver of fees, and undoubtedly only temporary, and that would be something the patent assignee would control. Biden could influence the assignee of course. The entire OP is ridiculous, nothing but a cheap inept political hit aimed at the extremely naive. .. This is the Kind of thing I'd expect from FOX, but this came from some other political hit shop... WSJ, owned by FOX. This has got to be a huge embarrassment to the WSJ, that still has today a few fairly sophisticated readers left. Their editors really screwed up on this one.