Because of the hypocrisy. Last summer it was about their position in the queue. 6 months later, with their procurement efforts gone tits up, it’s suddenly no longer about “who comes first served”.
I like the Disney analogy. You can be at the park when it opens but you can also book a fastpass 6 months beforehand.
Who’s misrepresenting reality here?
The UK got all their AZ quoata, the EU got 1/3 of theirs!
The EU have not banned export to Oz!
You claim you are not bias but since this AZ controvety you most certainly have!
1 Like
Ah Duggee.
One of the greatest kiddy TV shows out there. Go on , tell me I’m wrong
2 Likes
The UK got all their AZ quoata, the EU got 1/3 of theirs!
Apart from the absolute specifics of those numbers, is anyone saying anything different?
The EU have not banned export to Oz!
Italy has already blocked the export of 250,000 doses to Australia with other EU countries considering doing the same.
2 Likes
This potentially has serious consequences for the UK strategy of 12 weeks between doses for the Pfizer vaccine. I don’t believe any other nation is doing similar so it may only affect us:
I imagine there are not enough cancer patients who have had second doses of Pfizer yet to extend the study, so we may need to wait a while for this news to be validated. But it throws up many questions:
-
Will the cancer patients see a sharp antibody response if they are on a 12 week interval or can we expect that they will have a reduced antibody response? What I am getting at is if the issue is only that there will be little protection until the second dose in the 12th week or whether they will have reduced protection even after the 12th week?
-
Will the UK modify their vaccination regime to inoculate at 3 weeks to follow the Pfizer guidance? Even just for those with Cancer?
-
I am not sure why this isn’t even headline news on the BBC website. Only found it at the second article in the health section.
2 Likes
Fascinating
2 Likes
Don’t you see any hypocrisy ?
In that video you have EU MEP complaining about UK vaccine nationalism, because UK has a contract with AZ that gives them contractual priority.
When a few weeks ago the EU was demanding the UK vaccines because they incorrectly thought that they had contractual priority.
Claiming vaccine nationalism is not occurring, when the EU backed Italy blocking 250,000 samples being sent to Australia. (because they have contractual priority…)
The reality is the UK supported the AZ several months before the EU. They supported the early stage research in Oxford. (as described by those who developed the vaccine). They developed a better contract.
If roles had been reserved I would have been critical of the UK.
1 Like
@JU97ICE I think the major problem is the 12 week interval whilst having reduced efficacity and that goes for the general population. The 2/3 week protocols have not been tested that much however a 95% efficacity after the 2nd dose with such a protocol is good.
From what I have read extending that period can lead to even greater efficacity, however there is a limit, is the inbetween time that’s dangerous where efficacity isn’t so high.
Getting bogged down with specific groups of ‘patients’ isn’t helpful imo.
That was not your claim so why do you persist with your misrepresentations?
These are political reactions hyprocacy is part of the game, yet your postings are just as hypocritical can you not see that?
Then you exagerate what one sovriegn state does and label it as the EU and persist with it. Really?
1 Like
Italy is stopping the delivery to Australia based upon an EU contract to procure vaccines. Doing so under the new rules introduced by the EU on export controls. Italy informed the EU and they did not object.
In that video you have a German MEP (who sits on the EU vaccine advisory group) supporting Italy’s position. The French Health minister went on TV in support of Italy. German health minister said it was a short term win.
Even the Italian statement states the shipment was stopped because of the “continuing shortage of vaccines in the EU and in Italy and delays in supplies from AstraZeneca to the EU and Italy,”
I think its perfectly fair to say the EU. Thats not an exaggeration.
1 Like
Italy is only able to block the shipment to Australia with EU approval, so yes, it is down to the EU and the export mechanisms it introduced in January.
… and you persist!
This could just be a coincidence and needs further investigation, unfortunately does not help at all to build trust in this vaccine.
What is the EU doing?
The European Union is introducing export controls on coronavirus vaccines made in the bloc, amid a row about delivery shortfalls.
The so-called transparency mechanism gives EU countries powers to deny authorisation for vaccine exports if the company making them has not honoured existing contracts with the EU.
“The protection and safety of our citizens is a priority and the challenges we now face left us with no choice but to act,” the European Commission said.
Covid: Italy blocks AstraZeneca vaccine shipment to Australia - BBC News
Italy is the first EU country to use the bloc’s new regulations allowing exports to be stopped if the company providing the vaccines has failed to meet its obligations to the EU.
Australia has asked the European Commission to review Italy’s decision to block the export of 250,000 doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine to the country.
It is the first time new rules have been used that allow a ban on EU exports if the drug provider fails to meet its obligations to the bloc.
I’ve held back a long time, but @Flobs is right. You have been playing ping pong in EU bashing for weeks here. Eu this, Germany, France etc. that. It is annoying.
1 Like
The European Medicines Agency (EMA) said yesterday there was no evidence so far linking AstraZeneca to the two cases in Austria.
It said the number of thromboembolic events - marked by the formation of blood clots - in people who have received the AstraZeneca vaccine is no higher than that seen in the general population, with 22 cases of such events being reported among the 3 million people who have received it as of 9 March.
Did they report that some people have experienced constipation following receipt of the vaccine and that the proportion of people becoming constipated was the same as those in the general population? I can understand suspending trials for something like this but if it’s not even an anomaly when 3 million have been vaccinated…isn’t the reaction to suspend a little over the top?
1 Like
For me living in France there’s much more important incompetence to worry about, I mean we have to be locked in our houses at 18:00 hrs yet there’s no change in infection rates a completely superficial measure just to make it look like the government has done something.
Yet noone mentions it.
2 Likes
It’s not EU bashing to simply wish to discuss the situation as it actually exists. Has the UK escaped criticism for its handling of the pandemic? Has it fuck. And rightly not.
Discussion isn’t helped by wanting to choose your own facts.
Do you feel your government should be imposing even greater restrictions then? New cases in France have consistently been around 20,000 per day for the last two months. Yesterday they were 30,303 compared with the UK having 5,926. Presumably without those restrictions the case numbers would be even higher, no?