marcelh wrote:lightsaber wrote:tommy1808 wrote:
No penalty damages here, liability risk is low.
In the US and EU? Can you please post a link?
Last I read, the EU only indemnified above an unspecified limit:
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/09/25/astraze ... -deal.htmlNeither AZ nor J&J want the continued bad publicity the EU has thrown at them.
Has the EU made bad publicity about J&J? And about AZ, you still complain about the EU for "bad publicity", but it's AZ who is to blame by overpromising and underdelivering.
1. EU must indemnify for going forward vaccinated and for AZ, this is the time for a reset in the rhetoric.
The EU (by the EMA) still approves the use of the AZ vaccine without limitations
https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/news/astrazenecas-covid-19-vaccine-ema-finds-possible-link-very-rare-cases-unusual-blood-clots-low-bloodIt's the national health authority of the member states which are to blame for the restrictions
2. Both companies must create a united public relations campaign on their respective vaccines where they promise acheiveable goals instead of the current finger pointing.
For AZ is'ts way too late.
3. The EU (and every governing medical authority) must be the ones to set the guidelines and stop shrinking the guidelines. Pick who may get these two vaccines and then move forward.
The EU doesn't have the authority to do this; it's up to the member states.
The current anti-corpoeate environment has AZ having its reputation destroyed.
Wrong. AZ made a deal with the EU to deliver at least 90 million doses to the member states by the end of Q1. AZ failed miserably and destryed their reputation by themselves.
AZ made many mistakes. Time to plan ahead.
They were short doses, but much of the attack, in my opinion was political. e.g., "quasi-effective"
The world is short on vaccines in this 4th wave. A stand down is wise to reset expectations, set clear rules.
If the rules are set by the member states, get them to the table.
The added doses for 25 million with Pfizer is great, but cannot replace AZ and J&J.
If it is too late for AZ, then a regulated contract can be cancelled by either party. No board of directors should ever authorize doing business on a forward loss.
The point of a safety stand down is to stop the finger pointing on past action. There is no changing the past. So the question is, what is the right decision for the future.
I do risk analysis and the shade thrown on AZ and J&J is orders of magnitude off. Since both companies will try to make as much as possible, the goal should be to determine who gets the vaccine.
AZ being over 90 million doses short was a bad event. But nothing we say changes that.
The whole point of a strategy is to not overly rely on one vendor. For example, it is my opinion the USA heavily relied on J&J being the volume vendor. They are still struggling for volume. The UK relied too much on outside production; both are adapting (although the 1st dose UK rate will be poor until Novavax enters the market).
The whole point of a safety stand down is to stop expending so much effort on the past and focus on the future. If it is too late with AZ, fine. Those factories can be converted to J&J.
I care about the strategy on:
1. Vaccine volume
2. Vaccine hesitancy
The EU, USA, and UK are all at the easy part, vaccine volume. A stand down now is wise to start fixing the second part, vaccine hesitancy.
No one cares in the end who makes the decisions, but rather the results of those decisions.
My fervent hope is this stand down is used to fix the hesitancy to Adreno vaccines. That must be done by the standard risk reduction:
1. Take a pause to collect data
2. Determine the full risk matrix
3. Determine costs and mitigations to risks
There are multiple parties to these vaccines. Insisting on hammering on at fault doesn't solve anything. Oh, AZ will have penalties, but as at this time I see them at a forward loss, they must make a strategic decision.
Either J&J and AZ are given a chance to redeem themselves or not. The finger pointing must be demotivating the very staff needed to increase production. If their management doesn't act, it hurts us all.
The reality is, these two vaccines are expected to be very mass produced. I've seen estimates on AZ if 2 to 3 billion doses (I expect less, personally):
https://www.astrazeneca.com/what-scienc ... %20vaccine.
J&J, expectations are for over a billion doses:
https://www.voanews.com/covid-19-pandem ... 0in%202019.
Roughly a third of the global population could be vacvinated by these two vaccines. I've posted before on production in
AZ: Mexico, Brazil, Australia, Italy, USA, India
J&J: USA, UK, Italy, soon Germany and France
SII in India is a huge vaccine producer, but in my opinion not ready for mRNA.
This will be interesting. This isn't just the EU, but vaccine hesitancy and availability. The later is for the vendors, with government help, to fix. The former is good public awareness (IMHO great only in the UK).
Lightsaber
That, to me, implies the Swiss factory is ready. 
