Delays in rolling out vaccine

Note that the AZ vaccine hasn't been approved yet in the US.

Results from the long-awaited US trial of the Oxford-AstraZeneca Covid vaccine are out and confirm that the shot is both safe and highly effective.
More than 32,000 volunteers took part, mostly in America, but also in Chile and Peru.
The vaccine was 79% effective against stopping symptomatic Covid disease and 100% effective at preventing people from falling seriously ill.
And there were no safety issues regarding blood clots... Around a fifth of the volunteers in this trial were over 65 and the vaccine - given as two doses, four weeks apart - provided as much protection to them as to younger age groups.

www.bbc.co.uk

Covid vaccine: US trial of AstraZeneca jab confirms safety

Regulators in America have been waiting for these results to decide on approval.
www.bbc.co.uk
 
Nearly everyone in Israel has had at least one vaccine jab and the Rnumber is estimated to be 0.62.
I’m no authority, but that reads very high under the circumstances. IIRC it was lower than that here in July.
 
Looks like the number is 60% with 1 dose
The percentage of fully vaccinated people is 52%

Tel Aviv is partying again https://twitter.com/3Myriam1/status/1371552085687291906

I would also look more into mortality than the R-Number
1616417384487.png


1616416715491.png
 
www.bbc.com

Covid vaccines: EU tussle with UK over AstraZeneca escalates

A row over AstraZeneca vaccine supplies has soured post-Brexit relations, Katya Adler writes.
www.bbc.com

This is a good summary( if a little UK sided)of the stances of the EU and the UK regarding the AZ debacle. It will be interesting to see how it pans out.

My personal view is that someone needs to press the reset button given nothing is going to change the last 3 months.

If this continues to escalate it'll simply prolong the " rollout " across Europe where signs of infections are again on the rise.
 
Paul O Mahoney said:
It reveals that 39 people died which is more than what you said which was no deaths.
It's not difficult to understand 39 is greater than 0

Are you suggesting that the MHRA system of reporting is flawed and those deaths didn't occur.?

Sorry I was incorrect it wasn't 39 its 275 deaths still larger than " no deaths".
14 deep vein thrombosis too.
Click to expand...
Sorry I was scanning that file but couldn't find the 14 cases of thrombosis - could you perhaps pinpoint it to me?
 
I just think there must be something else going in the background with the UK EU dispute over vaccines. I agree it is in nobody's interest if things escalate. It must be the case that the UK are looking for something else in exchange for vaccines. Ursula von der Lyons is the one under the most pressure though, blaming the UK for everything doesn't ring through. Why for example is she not putting pressure on joe Biden to share the us az vaccines which they are not even using. There is obviously stuff they do not wish to discuss openly
 
Barbarossa82 said:
Sorry I was scanning that file but couldn't find the 14 cases of thrombosis - could you perhaps pinpoint it to me?
Click to expand...
Start from the bottom and slowly work your way up .......from memory that's the easiest way to read it.

Edit: That report has been updated and its format changed. Bottom of page 1 refers to Thrombosis....
 
Last edited:
joe sod said:
I just think there must be something else going in the background with the UK EU dispute over vaccines. I agree it is in nobody's interest if things escalate. It must be the case that the UK are looking for something else in exchange for vaccines. Ursula von der Lyons is the one under the most pressure though, blaming the UK for everything doesn't ring through. Why for example is she not putting pressure on joe Biden to share the us az vaccines which they are not even using. There is obviously stuff they do not wish to discuss openly
Click to expand...
She isn't blaming the UK , actually nobody is......this is an Astrazeneca issue.
 
Neither the U.K. nor the U.S.A are exporting vaccines. Everything produced within their borders stays within their borders.
The E.U. is the biggest producer of Covid-19 vaccines but it has exported vaccines to dozens of countries outside of its borders.

Vaccine nationalism has been a huge factor in the successful rollout of vaccines in the U.K. and the U.S.A.
 
EasilyAmused said:
Neither the U.K. nor the U.S.A are exporting vaccines. Everything produced within their borders stays within their borders.
The E.U. is the biggest producer of Covid-19 vaccines but it has exported vaccines to dozens of countries outside of its borders.

Vaccine nationalism has been a huge factor in the successful rollout of vaccines in the U.K. and the U.S.A.
Click to expand...

The UK has exported vital components of the pfizer vaccine to the EU, and components for other vaccines which form an essential part of the supply chain for the vaccines distributed in the EU (and UK).
The USA has an export ban. The UK does not.
There are questions about Astrazeneca production.
 
This is a good article on the difference between the UK and EU contracts. While the UK doesn't have an export ban, it's contracts with AZ means exactly that. UK production is for UK demand and any shortfall must be made up from other locations including the EU. Morally, it is vaccine nationalism just like export bans but from a legal and common sense point of view, they wiped the floor with the EU because they looked at the entire supply chain.

www.politico.eu

How the UK gained an edge with AstraZeneca’s vaccine commitments

A comparison of the UK and EU contracts shows that London’s deal has extra teeth.
www.politico.eu www.politico.eu
 
Sunny said:
This is a good article on the difference between the UK and EU contracts. While the UK doesn't have an export ban, it's contracts with AZ means exactly that. UK production is for UK demand and any shortfall must be made up from other locations including the EU. Morally, it is vaccine nationalism just like export bans but from a legal and common sense point of view, they wiped the floor with the EU because they looked at the entire supply chain.

www.politico.eu

How the UK gained an edge with AstraZeneca’s vaccine commitments

A comparison of the UK and EU contracts shows that London’s deal has extra teeth.
www.politico.eu www.politico.eu
Click to expand...
It is a very good article on the contract differences.
It does mean in effect AZ production is prioritised for UK. There is no export ban, it is that the AZ contract has committed them to prioritising UK supply.
But where does the article say that "UK production is for UK demand"?
 
odyssey06 said:
It is a very good article on the contract differences.
It does mean in effect AZ production is prioritised for UK. There is no export ban, it is that the AZ contract has committed them to prioritising UK supply.
But where does the article say that "UK production is for UK demand"?
Click to expand...

Because all UK production has to meet the UK's demand until the UK's order is complete. So if the UK have ordered 200m doses and UK production is 50m each month for the next four months, then there is no room for AZ to use UK production for other regions until the UK order is complete. It is a de facto export ban. They can't give 40m to the UK and 10m to the EU each month. It looks like the UK were very clever and aggressive with their contract negotiations compared to the EU.
 
Sunny said:
Because all UK production has to meet the UK's demand until the UK's order is complete. So if the UK have ordered 200m doses and UK production is 50m each month for the next four months, then there is no room for AZ to use UK production for other regions until the UK order is complete. It is a de facto export ban. They can't give 40m to the UK and 10m to the EU each month. It looks like the UK were very clever and aggressive with their contract negotiations compared to the EU.
Click to expand...

"UK production must meet UK demand" is not the same as "UK production must only be for UK demand".
UK production is needed to meet UK demand.
Yes, in practice, it means no vaccines are exported but it is not an export ban.
If AZ had the vaccines in sufficient quantities they could export them.

While the UK were very clever in the contract negotiations and the EU seem inexperienced (and UK contract law favours the buyer) the significance of the UK contract should have been declared by AZ to the EU during negotiations and they may run into trouble on the 'good faith' argument there (in Belgian law).
 
I'm still of the opinion that AZ should have declared that they were in effect bound to supply the UK even from European plants first .

Negotiations are a tough exercise and while one negotiates to get the best deal any factor that prohibits the reasonable execution of any contract should be highlighted.

I still find it odd that the UK officially signed off on their contract a day after the EU, eventough they had legal "heads of agreement " done in May. AZ still took over €350m for the same purposes that the UK gave money. Best efforts isn't approximately 30% of contracted quantity and late notice of delays , days , isn't a professional way of doing business.

Of course these are moot points and it's more important to find a solution and dial down the rethoric and get an agreement that guarantees Qtr 2 supplies at the bare minimum.
 
I never said it is an export ban. I said it is a de facto export ban. If the EU had signed the same contracts with suppliers as the UK did, there would be no vaccines going to the UK which is not currently the case or to any other Country because all the manufacturers would be using all their EU production to meet EU demand. So there would have been no need for the EU to put in place an export ban. Just like there is no need for the UK to put in an export ban. Instead they get to slam the EU for talking about export bans when millions of vaccines have gone from the EU to the UK with zero vaccines going from the UK to the EU.

There is plenty of blame in all this go around. To be fair to AZ, they more than likely didn't forsee the production problems just like the EU didn't. The EU contracts seem vague in comparison to the UK ones. The UK were pretty ruthless with vaccines from day 1. They prevented US drug firms from partnering with Oxford to produce the vaccines because they didn't trust (rightly) that would be able to access US produced supplies. Then the EU seem to have signed away their right to take legal action over delivery delays which to a layperson like me sounds crazy. The EU seem to have been too nice to be honest.....

I agree though that this fighting achieves nothing.
 
Sunny said:
There is plenty of blame in all this go around. To be fair to AZ, they more than likely didn't forsee the production problems just like the EU didn't. The EU contracts seem vague in comparison to the UK ones. The UK were pretty ruthless with vaccines from day 1. They prevented US drug firms from partnering with Oxford to produce the vaccines because they didn't trust (rightly) that would be able to access US produced supplies. Then the EU seem to have signed away their right to take legal action over delivery delays which to a layperson like me sounds crazy. The EU seem to have been too nice to be honest.....

I agree though that this fighting achieves nothing.
Click to expand...
But Sunny there aren't any production problems really, the 4 EU based plants that belong to AZ are producing as there hasn't been any supply issues to the UK , and of course those EU based plants are exporting to other countries eg Australia.

The only supply issue now for the UK and by extension the EU is India. I mean the EU are getting AZ vaccines from India when in reality the European plants could supply the EU and the UK could be supplied with excess and all the production that she has, there apparently is another plant in the UK that was meant to be operating now but there is no news on that ?

For all the money AZ received, and that includes $1bn from the US administration they seem to be one country centric at the moment.

You can see the EUs frustration.....
 
Paul O Mahoney said:
But Sunny there aren't any production problems really, the 4 EU based plants that belong to AZ are producing as there hasn't been any supply issues to the UK , and of course those EU based plants are exporting to other countries eg Australia.

The only supply issue now for the UK and by extension the EU is India. I mean the EU are getting AZ vaccines from India when in reality the European plants could supply the EU and the UK could be supplied with excess and all the production that she has, there apparently is another plant in the UK that was meant to be operating now but there is no news on that ?

For all the money AZ received, and that includes $1bn from the US administration they seem to be one country centric at the moment.

You can see the EUs frustration.....
Click to expand...

The US has 30 million doses of AZ they are sitting on as AZ goes through approval there.
Another 20 million is nearly ready.
The US has ok'd the release of 5 million of these to neighbouring countries.
So it's not all about the UK.

But there seems to be reports on Twitter some sort of olive branch emerging around the stockpile at the Halix plant in the Netherlands being shared by the EU and UK.
 
odyssey06 said:
The US has 30 million doses of AZ they are sitting on as AZ goes through approval there.
Another 20 million is nearly ready.
The US has ok'd the release of 5 million of these to neighbouring countries.
So it's not all about the UK.

But there seems to be reports on Twitter some sort of olive branch emerging around the stockpile at the Halix plant in the Netherlands being shared by the EU and UK.
Click to expand...
Oh I think a compromise will be found.

I tried linking a story on Fierce Pharma apparently some agency in the US aren't very happy with AZs data in the trial. Even Fauci has had a go.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top