"Confident " really isn't a scientific procedure.
Didn't know that.Confidence is a scientific concept and can be quantified - though, a bit like "theory", confidence used in a non-scientific context tends to have a different meaning
Still waiting for the EMA, it's obvious that they are now under immense political pressure given the row between AZ and Eu. They must be crafting their decision based on what the EU Is doing with AZ. This has very little to do with science but a he'll of alot to do with politics.
There's no shortage of conjecture and hyperbole when it comes to Covid19 and, as we all know, hyperbole will be the death of us all.
In your rather tainted view. The redacted copy released by the EU clearly states that Astrazeneca are to supply from the UK if shortfalls the European plants couldn't fulfill orders.Threatening legal action straight away without listening to the company and not reading the contract properly was the mistake.
I'd say they'll press on. It does give some protection and there are studies going on in the UK that one thing I read might give data by mid February.So big decision now for authorities here do they press on with AZ for over 70s or use the vaccines for which there is more certainty but are logistically challenging to roll out.
Because the EMA made it known that they were not going to approve the vaccine in December as in the independent.ie article from December I posted, therefore they had to get the data that they were looking for ready before they could apply, fairly sensible.Astrazeneca have a lot to explain here too, they must have said the plants would be ready to supply but they aren't, one excuse was low yield, and then tried to use the fact that the EU were 3 months behind the UK in ordering.
Of course Astrazeneca didn't even apply until weeks after they got UK approval why?
You do realise that the initial vaccines that Astrazeneca produced for the UK were made in the same European plants that miraculously developed "yield issues " as soon as the UK plants became operational.Because the EMA made it known that they were not going to approve the vaccine in December as in the independent.ie article from December I posted, therefore they had to get the data that they were looking for ready before they could apply, fairly sensible.
It was only because the EU then came under huge pressure in January due to the huge third wave , new variants, and the lack of progress in vaccinations in comparison to other countries that they buckled when AZ informed them that their initial yields would be much lower.
Now they still havn't learned and look like they are trying to block exports of vaccines to third countries outside EU besides UK like Japan, this is really stupid and short sighted because we need lots of things from Japan, what if they retaliate, Trump would be rightly heavily criticised if he tried do something like this.
To use a favourite retort by another poster "have you a source for that" ?You do realise that the initial vaccines that Astrazeneca produced for the UK were made in the same European plants that miraculously developed "yield issues " as soon as the UK plants became operational.
"Yet here’s a fact that fits awkwardly into that narrative: according to Britain’s vaccine taskforce, its initial supply of AstraZeneca doses were made in the EU, in plants in [broken link removed] and the [broken link removed]."
From the Irish Times a few days ago , it was approximately 500,000 plus doses.
Ill refer you to my earlier post on the reasons why the EU have taken the action it has as it appears you missed it.
Wouldn't we all, the point I'm trying to make is that those plants were operating then all of a sudden the yield goes down.The EU are short a lot more than 500,000 doses. I would be curious what percentage of UK total to come from EU plants.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?