JJJ wrote:

flipdewaf wrote:

marcelh wrote:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9512513/EU-sues-AstraZeneca-shortfall-Covid-vaccine-supplies.html
And the UK “alternative facts machine” is spreading it’s lies....

Meh! They f*cked up it seems. Still, if they messed up a contract and double booked production they need to decide the least worst option. Seems the commission didn’t write as good of a contract as the uk and AZ showed which they’d rather supply. From what I’ve heard the uk contract had ‘more teeth’.

More like an issue between Belgian vs British law.

But remains to be seen if the penalties specified out in the British contract will actually be higher in the long run than whatever comes out of the courts. Then there's the huge cost to AZ image as a reputable supplier which has already happened no matter what the courts settle.

Agreed, we’d also have to look at the reputational damage to the EU if it uses border blocks to cover for bad contracts and the impact that may have on business decisions. Like you say, we may have to wait to see how this shakes out.

Fred


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What reputational damage? Do you think the whole world is full of idiots that are unable to see who allowed vaccines to be exported and who like UK and US hoarded them?

Olddog wrote:

What reputational damage? Do you think the whole world is full of idiots that are unable to see who allowed vaccines to be exported and who like UK and US hoarded them?

I wasn’t aware the uk hoarded them? As far as I knew they went in arms? The reputational damage in that contracts are not worth anything with certain parties as they can end up using powers that exist outside of those contracts if they don’t like the outcomes. Has the uk blocked a single export? Has the commission or any of the countries part of it done so?

I work in an industry regarded as very strategically important, (perhaps more so than pharma)the risk of exporting from certain markets has changed, this is influencing decisions on supply chains.

Fred


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

lightsaber wrote:

Seahawk,
I agree with your timeline.

What amazes me is the UK rate remains ahead of the EU.

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/dail ... +Union~NLD

The EU seems to have supply. I'm a bit confused as to how the EU will achieve goals.
21.25% vaccinated 1st dose, so for goal another 48.75% *2 (two doses).
https://ourworldindata.org/covid-vaccinations

At the EU's prior peak of .55 doses per hundred, the hit 70% 3rd week October. So I look forward to the acceleration.

I am a cynic as for everyone (not EU specific) ramping up vaccinations as we've already discussed prior promises not meeting expectations.

There will be more waves until a reasonable herd immunity is reached. So far only Israel and possibly the UK; I consider the UK in a quasi-static immunity (it will fade quickly).

So I hope to see the EU >70% by end July.

Lightsaber

But the delivery plans sees a constant increase of doses until Q3/2021 when the EU should reach a peak of delivered doses.

That is the plan for Germany and only for the already certified mRNA solutions: https://www.bundesgesundheitsministeriu ... uartal.pdf

So far Biontech has mostly met the predictions.

flipdewaf wrote:

JJJ wrote:

flipdewaf wrote:

Meh! They f*cked up it seems. Still, if they messed up a contract and double booked production they need to decide the least worst option. Seems the commission didn’t write as good of a contract as the uk and AZ showed which they’d rather supply. From what I’ve heard the uk contract had ‘more teeth’.

More like an issue between Belgian vs British law.

But remains to be seen if the penalties specified out in the British contract will actually be higher in the long run than whatever comes out of the courts. Then there's the huge cost to AZ image as a reputable supplier which has already happened no matter what the courts settle.

Agreed, we’d also have to look at the reputational damage to the EU if it uses border blocks to cover for bad contracts and the impact that may have on business decisions. Like you say, we may have to wait to see how this shakes out.

There's no safeward that protects you from bad faith on one of the actors. Doesn't matter if it's Belgian, British or Belarussian law.

Do you honestly think that if AZ would have chosen to stiff the UK instead of the EU it wouldn't have ended in court?

Olddog wrote:

What reputational damage? Do you think the whole world is full of idiots that are unable to see who allowed vaccines to be exported and who like UK and US hoarded them?

This. A lot of people outside the EU still think it’s a union of “useful idiots”. People at this forum are bragging about how many people have been saved in the UK by the vaccination program and conveniently ignoring the fact that a lot of those vaccines were produced in the EU. Those are the same blaming the EU for being incompetent while AZ (part British) hasn’t been able to meet their contractual obligations by far. AZ was 90 million doses short by the end of March; those could have saved a lot of people (I personally know one of them, may he Rest In Peace).

It seems the EU has started a worldwide communication campaign.
https://eeas.europa.eu/delegations/japa ... e/96794_en

In Canada for example opinion piece in The Globe and Mail from Melita Gabric, the European Union ambassador to Canada.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/amp/opi ... democracy/

marcelh wrote:

Olddog wrote:

What reputational damage? Do you think the whole world is full of idiots that are unable to see who allowed vaccines to be exported and who like UK and US hoarded them?

This. A lot of people outside the EU still think it’s a union of “useful idiots”. People at this forum are bragging about how many people have been saved in the UK by the vaccination program and conveniently ignoring the fact that a lot of those vaccines were produced in the EU. Those are the same blaming the EU for being incompetent while AZ (part British) hasn’t been able to meet their contractual obligations by far. AZ was 90 million doses short by the end of March; those could have saved a lot of people (I personally know one of them, may he Rest In Peace).

There's a kite-flying feel to this that I'm not sure I understand, and that in my opinion is not reflected in the posting..

Who thinks the EU is a union of "useful idiots" - on this thread at least. Ignore the Express, Mail, and Boris's cronies.
Some of us have expressed concerns over certain aspects of the EU's vaccination journey, but then we've done the same to the UK and other countries.
As it stands, I think the EMA has been completely coherent in its approach.
Some of the member states, such as Germany and France seem to have gone their own way in some cases, and in doing so exhibited a less than coherent and conflicted approach to, for example, the AZ vaccine and how it should be used.
The head of the vaccine committee in Germany admitted that this had caused an issue
I get the feeling that is in the past now, as vaccination momentum build..

"Bragging" abut how many people have been saved in the UK?
Many lives have been saved. That's a fact.
Most of that discussion has been to support how effective the AZ vaccine is and that it should be respected as such.
And it should. It saves lives. Lots of them. "Bragging"?
Really unpleasant comment if I may say so

We all get that AZ have not met their contractual commitments.
We might question how robust the contract with the EU was compared to that with the UK and whether AZ have looked for an easy way out.
In the current circumstances, I would have thought that helping AZ get up to speed as much as possible would be the most appropriate response to maximise the supply of vaccine.
The legal case should follow when there is more stability in my opinion.

I agree, there's no doubt the AZ vaccines shipped to the UK would have saved lives in the EU
They did save lives in the UK
I wonder whether saving lives in the UK is seen as a less noble use of the vaccine than saving lives in the EU, and if so, why that is, and why it would be seen as "bragging" to say so?

If the legal action forces AZ out of the vaccination programme, that will be millions of lives around the world that won't be saved until the supply of other vaccines completely meets demand.
Is that really a good outcome?

Rgds

astuteman wrote:

We might question how robust the contract with the EU was

no competing obligations, contractual or otherwise for the named production sites, i.e. exclusivity.

I would have thought that helping AZ get up to speed as much as possible

remember when EMA bagged AZ to provide data to authorize the Dutch production site and AZ couldn´t be bothered to even file the application?

marcelh wrote:

AirbusCheerlead wrote:

It seems the EU has started a worldwide communication campaign.
https://eeas.europa.eu/delegations/japa ... e/96794_en

In Canada for example opinion piece in The Globe and Mail from Melita Gabric, the European Union ambassador to Canada.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/amp/opi ... democracy/

Some COVID vaccine numbers from second link:
Nearly 280 million doses produced in the EU, of which 134 million have been exported.

i think both numbers are just starting from February.

best regards
Thomas

Signing delivery contracts you do not intend to hold, can not go unchallenged, especially in such an important field where lives actually depend on it.

seahawk wrote:

Signing delivery contracts you do not intend to hold, can not go unchallenged, especially in such an important field where lives actually depend on it.

I'm reasonably sure AZ didn't intend to renege on the contract at the time they signed.

What they did and said once they knew they couldn't meet their obligations however is inexcusable.

Compare this with the backstory of the Pfizer/Biontech vaccine, still bumpy but smooth as silk compared to the other competitors.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/28/worl ... ccine.html

tommy1808 wrote:

no competing obligations, contractual or otherwise for the named production sites, i.e. exclusivity.

I'm pretty sure the contract had a lot more in it than those few words.....
There has to be more of a reason that AZ prioritised the UK that "we just don't like the EU"

tommy1808 wrote:

remember when EMA bagged AZ to provide data to authorize the Dutch production site and AZ couldn´t be bothered to even file the application?

For what its worth I don't, but I wasn't following back then.
Today we are where we are, and what matters is the actions going forward that maximise the availability of vaccines for everyone

I've no argument with the EU's gripe over AZ's contractual obligations. They've failed dismally.
I think the nervousness that the likes of myself and GDB have is when that spills over into a more emotive backlash against the vaccine itself that might have long term implications.

It's perhaps the not helpful to the taking of sides that the vaccines that AZ provided to the UK at the EU's expense have been woven into a strategy that has proved extremely successful, and highlighted the effectiveness of the vaccine when properly applied, so we will naturally have a positive view of it, having seen the outcome first hand.

Rgds

astuteman wrote:

tommy1808 wrote:

no competing obligations, contractual or otherwise for the named production sites, i.e. exclusivity.

I'm pretty sure the contract had a lot more in it than those few words.....

Of course, but when you get the output of productions sites exclusively, and then get told "oh, these are UK exclusive", words in contracts become irrelevant.

There has to be more of a reason that AZ prioritised the UK that "we just don't like the EU"

Better make at least a friend than two enemies. And the UK was perfectly willing to sabotage Pfizers production for half the Planet to protect their friend. I would say it worked quite well for AZ.

For what its worth I don't, but I wasn't following back then.
Today we are where we are, and what matters is the actions going forward that maximise the availability of vaccines for everyone

That has been done, but instead of throwing money at a "partner" that can´t be relied upon, money was thrown at partners that delivered more than they promised. Heck, if there was the ordenace on the book AZ should have been stripped of its facilities to hand it over to J&J for production. From the EU perspective AZ has far less availability, and effectively costs the same as a shot of Biontech considering the down-payments. Going for the more effective vaccine makes sense in that circumstance, so that is where the resources go. Not saying AZ is not effective here, just that the BNT vaccine is more so. The mRNA vaccines also have the added advantage of being speedily adjustable to new virus strains, so it makes even more sense to ramp up capacity there.

I think the nervousness that the likes of myself and GDB have is when that spills over into a more emotive backlash against the vaccine itself that might have long term implications.
Rgds

There is no problem finding arms to inject AZ into and by the time we get into the vaccination hesitant population AZ won´t be a supplier anymore, or be needed as Biontech will churn out AZs total deliveries in about a month in just one facility at that time. April is almost out and AZ has still only managed 31.4 million doses, which means they keep falling even further behind as time progresses.

best regards
Thomas

tommy1808 wrote:

And the UK was perfectly willing to sabotage Pfizers production for half the Planet to protect their friend.

You mean to say that half the planet's Pfizer production is dependent upon supplies being exported from the UK, and that the UK is not quite the complete parasite that its made out to be by our EU colleagues? Glad we got that straight..... Not quite as simple as the narrative is made out, is it?

tommy1808 wrote:

That has been done, but instead of throwing money at a "partner" that can´t be relied upon, money was thrown at partners that delivered more than they promised

.

That makes sense, I guess

tommy1808 wrote:

Not saying AZ is not effective here, just that the BNT vaccine is more so. The mRNA vaccines also have the added advantage of being speedily adjustable to new virus strains, so it makes even more sense to ramp up capacity there.

A fair point. AZ is more effective than no vaccine at all, though

tommy1808 wrote:

There is no problem finding arms to inject AZ into and by the time we get into the vaccination hesitant population AZ won´t be a supplier anymore, or be needed as Biontech will churn out AZs total deliveries in about a month in just one facility at that time. April is almost out and AZ has still only managed 31.4 million doses, which means they keep falling even further behind as time progresses.

I assume this statement and the number is written from a European perspective.
I think it is going to be a very long time before the whole of the planet is inundated with mRNA vaccines sufficient to discard the AZ. I don't think we're there yet..

Rgds

tommy1808 wrote:

There has to be more of a reason that AZ prioritised the UK that "we just don't like the EU"

Better make at least a friend than two enemies. And the UK was perfectly willing to sabotage Pfizers production for half the Planet to protect their friend. I would say it worked quite well for AZ.

Indeed, the issue the EU has with AZ is the way in which it seems to have actively worked together with the UK government throughout to cover up both its own industrial shortfalls as well as its contractual fuckups AND protect its commercial headstart, all in return for them underpinning a purely political British domestic project with a relative vaccination success at the cost of others...

That is both a criminal offence on behalf of the company, as well as a hostile act on behalf of a befriended government.

So far, the EU has only gone after AZ, but rest assured, the case is building and the UK government will be presented with some serious consequences at the appropriate time too, because it has not gone unnoticed in Europe how the UK has actively engaged to deliberately try to push the EU deeper into trouble in order to make a point about Brexit at home...

In the end, the cunning plan by the British government seems not just to have failed because the EU will finish its coordinated vaccination just 5 weeks after the UK (having started about 5 weeks later too) thanks to the stellar success of the biontech/pfizer vaccine, the political sabotage also got noticed by the EU.

astuteman wrote:

tommy1808 wrote:

There is no problem finding arms to inject AZ into and by the time we get into the vaccination hesitant population AZ won´t be a supplier anymore, or be needed as Biontech will churn out AZs total deliveries in about a month in just one facility at that time. April is almost out and AZ has still only managed 31.4 million doses, which means they keep falling even further behind as time progresses.

I assume this statement and the number is written from a European perspective.
I think it is going to be a very long time before the whole of the planet is inundated with mRNA vaccines sufficient to discard the AZ. I don't think we're there yet..
Rgds

From a EU perspective, the AZ vaccine is as good as finished.
The EC didnt even bother firming up an option on another 100m doses it still had with AZ, recently.

An increasing number of European countries have already decided that they will no longer rely on AZ at all for their vaccination campaigns as from next month.
Denmark was first, but meanwhile Norway has taken a similar path, while The Netherlands leave it to the appreciation of each indidual citizen whether he/she still wants AZ or prefers to wait a few weeks for a superior mRNA vaccine. Same in my country. Others will follow, as the EC will move heaven and earth to push AZ out asap, after which Im in no doubt the EU will happily depict the British Oxford vaccine (sic) as a low tech emergency product only, suitable for third world countries, but not on a par with the scientificially more advanced mRNA vaccines developed in the EU. The pleasure of being able to do not once, but 27 times, after all the off the record smear from the UK will simply be too tempting to resist.

astuteman wrote:

tommy1808 wrote:

no competing obligations, contractual or otherwise for the named production sites, i.e. exclusivity.

I'm pretty sure the contract had a lot more in it than those few words.....
There has to be more of a reason that AZ prioritised the UK that "we just don't like the EU"

[/quote]

The original unpublished contract between the UK and AZ probably has a lot to do with it.

Because it makes absolutely no business sense to piss off one of your biggest partners in such a spectacular way.

Or just good old incompetence. Pharma companies have a history of skating and being buddies with the regulator. Maybe they just thought they could get away with it with the standard excuses and underestimated the media and regulatory attention to the issue.

astuteman wrote:

tommy1808 wrote:

And the UK was perfectly willing to sabotage Pfizers production for half the Planet to protect their friend.

You mean to say that half the planet's Pfizer production is dependent upon supplies being exported from the UK, and that the UK is not quite the complete parasite that its made out to be by our EU colleagues? Glad we got that straight..... Not quite as simple as the narrative is made out, is it?

The new EU purchase agreement with Pfizer makes sure to bring the whole supply chain to the EU down to the individual components so there's a grain of truth there.

Lessons learned and all that.

sabenapilot wrote:

astuteman wrote:

tommy1808 wrote:

There is no problem finding arms to inject AZ into and by the time we get into the vaccination hesitant population AZ won´t be a supplier anymore, or be needed as Biontech will churn out AZs total deliveries in about a month in just one facility at that time. April is almost out and AZ has still only managed 31.4 million doses, which means they keep falling even further behind as time progresses.

I assume this statement and the number is written from a European perspective.
I think it is going to be a very long time before the whole of the planet is inundated with mRNA vaccines sufficient to discard the AZ. I don't think we're there yet..
Rgds

From a EU perspective, the AZ vaccine is as good as finished.
The EC didnt even bother firming up an option on another 100m doses it still had with AZ, recently.

An increasing number of European countries have already decided that they will no longer rely on AZ at all for their vaccination campaigns as from next month.
Denmark was first, but meanwhile Norway has taken a similar path, while The Netherlands leave it to the appreciation of each indidual citizen whether he/she still wants AZ or prefers to wait a few weeks for a superior mRNA vaccine. Same in my country. Others will follow, as the EC will move heaven and earth to push AZ out asap, after which Im in no doubt the EU will happily depict the British Oxford vaccine (sic) as a low tech emergency product only, suitable for third world countries, but not on a par with the scientificially more advanced mRNA vaccines developed in the EU. The pleasure of being able to do not once, but 27 times, after all the off the record smear from the UK will simply be too tempting to resist.

Can't beat claiming the high ground eh?
Infantile response, to be honest.
Just creates a reality out of rhetorical perception

astuteman wrote:

tommy1808 wrote:

And the UK was perfectly willing to sabotage Pfizers production for half the Planet to protect their friend.

You mean to say that half the planet's Pfizer production is dependent upon supplies being exported from the UK, and that the UK is not quite the complete parasite that its made out to be by our EU colleagues? Glad we got that straight..... Not quite as simple as the narrative is made out, is it?

Yup, a company in the UK won the initial contract for the lipids, still a EU wide tender at the time to find the best price point. Due to UK government action they may not get follow up orders, as it also led to massive orders from EU suppliers that started shipping in quantity just a few weeks ago. Heck, the German governments seem to be hell bend to have an entirely domestic vaccine supply chain to hand out an mRNA shot for its citizens every 6 weeks..... talk about overcompensating.

]Not saying AZ is not effective here, just that the BNT vaccine is more so. The mRNA vaccines also have the added advantage of being speedily adjustable to new virus strains, so it makes even more sense to ramp up capacity there.

A fair point. AZ is more effective than no vaccine at all, though

very much so, and also quite a bit better than having just the Chinese vaccines on hand.

tommy1808 wrote:

There is no problem finding arms to inject AZ into and by the time we get into the vaccination hesitant population AZ won´t be a supplier anymore, or be needed as Biontech will churn out AZs total deliveries in about a month in just one facility at that time. April is almost out and AZ has still only managed 31.4 million doses, which means they keep falling even further behind as time progresses.

I assume this statement and the number is written from a European perspective.

Yes. The US already arrived at that point it would appear.

I think it is going to be a very long time before the whole of the planet is inundated with mRNA vaccines sufficient to discard the AZ. I don't think we're there yet..

In deed, that crossover point may be quite far out, depending on how many adapted boosters are needed. If its one shot/year like with flu vaccines mRMA capacity should probably happens sometimes next year. If vaccines need adapting vector based vaccines may be OBE anyhow, but that would of course lead to further supply shortage on the global stage.

best regards
Thomas

astuteman wrote:

sabenapilot wrote:

astuteman wrote:

Can't beat claiming the high ground eh?
Infantile response, to be honest.
Just creates a reality out of rhetorical perception

I'm simply recounting what is happening right now in several national vaccination strategies throughout Europe and predicting what will happen in due course in most other EU countries too; it's just a matter of time really before AZ is officially renegaded to being depicted as a second class vaccine by all EU politicians one by one and with much pleasure too I'm sure
Just reading the recent public remarks of some top political figures from the EU about AZ and their Oxford vaccine already shows how thin the line is they walk and rest assured: they are very eager to cross it with 2 feet the very moment they feel ready for it. And it won't just be the manufacturer who's going to take a public beating over their misconduct; that 'much better country than every single one of them' will get its fair portion of it too, I guess.
Nothing infantile about it: just the current state of bilateral politics across the Channel, sadly, and by one party's clear free choice that is.

sabenapilot wrote:

astuteman wrote:

sabenapilot wrote:

by all EU politicians one by one and with much pleasure too I'm sure

I'm sure you mean 'Clinicians", no? You would do well to replace the word "Politicians" if you want to recover any shred of credibility from your argument.

If the EU-AZ contract was so sound, why would AZ favour an insignificant country of 60 million people over a bloc with 350 million people?

Denigrating a safe and effective vaccine due to an incompetent and embarrassing procurement process is rather childish, no?

DNDTUF wrote:

If the EU-AZ contract was so sound, why would AZ favour an insignificant country of 60 million people over a bloc with 350 million people?

Because the only alternative would have been significantly under-delivering to both of them, enraging both. The contracts are as identical as they can be considering they are under different applicable law.

best regards
Thomas

DNDTUF wrote:

I'm sure you mean 'Clinicians", no? You would do well to replace the word "Politicians" if you want to recover any shred of credibility from your argument.

If the EU-AZ contract was so sound, why would AZ favour an insignificant country of 60 million people over a bloc with 350 million people?

Denigrating a safe and effective vaccine due to an incompetent and embarrassing procurement process is rather childish, no?

Horse has long left the barn, I do not believe there will be a change in course that will see the EU support the AZ vaccine. If they have to implement additional lockdowns while Pfizer ramps up that is an easy option, protest against continued lockdowns are minimal at best when looked at across the member states, the situation presently taking place in India will ease objections to the additional measures.
Individuals may think differently but the point of governments is grouping, I accept the thoughts of other EU supporters that AZ is done in the EU and its future going forward is in serious doubt, all depends on how far the EU is willing to go in influencing third world countries to abandon AZ even though its cost is lower and its storage / transportation infrastructure is lower than Pfizer. A number of countries outside of the EU listen to their discourse, the words of the two country leaders on the AZ vaccine in the EU may be downplayed, in the developing world it had much greater effect, the restrictions and now the law suit is driving the final nails.
Economies already in hoc to banks / governments in the developed world won't see much difference in keeping their economies in check for another few months while Pfizer / Moderna / JJ complete their local projects then make supplies available.

tommy1808 wrote:

astuteman wrote:

tommy1808 wrote:

And the UK was perfectly willing to sabotage Pfizers production for half the Planet to protect their friend.

You mean to say that half the planet's Pfizer production is dependent upon supplies being exported from the UK, and that the UK is not quite the complete parasite that its made out to be by our EU colleagues? Glad we got that straight..... Not quite as simple as the narrative is made out, is it?

Yup, a company in the UK won the initial contract for the lipids, still a EU wide tender at the time to find the best price point. Due to UK government action they may not get follow up orders, as it also led to massive orders from EU suppliers that started shipping in quantity just a few weeks ago. Heck, the German governments seem to be hell bend to have an entirely domestic vaccine supply chain to hand out an mRNA shot for its citizens every 6 weeks..... talk about overcompensating.

]Not saying AZ is not effective here, just that the BNT vaccine is more so. The mRNA vaccines also have the added advantage of being speedily adjustable to new virus strains, so it makes even more sense to ramp up capacity there.

A fair point. AZ is more effective than no vaccine at all, though

very much so, and also quite a bit better than having just the Chinese vaccines on hand.

tommy1808 wrote:

There is no problem finding arms to inject AZ into and by the time we get into the vaccination hesitant population AZ won´t be a supplier anymore, or be needed as Biontech will churn out AZs total deliveries in about a month in just one facility at that time. April is almost out and AZ has still only managed 31.4 million doses, which means they keep falling even further behind as time progresses.

I assume this statement and the number is written from a European perspective.

Yes. The US already arrived at that point it would appear.

I think it is going to be a very long time before the whole of the planet is inundated with mRNA vaccines sufficient to discard the AZ. I don't think we're there yet..

In deed, that crossover point may be quite far out, depending on how many adapted boosters are needed. If its one shot/year like with flu vaccines mRMA capacity should probably happens sometimes next year. If vaccines need adapting vector based vaccines may be OBE anyhow, but that would of course lead to further supply shortage on the global stage.

best regards
Thomas

Thanks Thomas.

It's nice to see the EU and its member states grabbing the vaccination programme by the scruff of the neck.
I've always considered myself pro-European - one of the reasons I've been a vocal supporter of Airbus over the years.
I can't answer for UK right wing press, or members of the government, but I didn't support Brexit.
I am saddened to feel lumped together in that bucket by posters I thought I respected.
Ah well. It is what it is I guess

I am also saddened to see comments that almost sound like schadenfreude aimed at an organisation that in good faith tried to bring to bear a cheap, easy to produce, easy to distribute vaccine for the masses - just as much as I am saddened to hear the scornful boast of it being relegated to "a vaccine for the third world".

Personally, given the original intent, I'd be inclined to take that as a compliment as it unquestionably aligns to that original intent.
I don't think the organisation that seems to have just cracked a malaria vaccine for the first time in history will get overly concerned about that.
Who knows?

Rgds

Sorry I accidentally pressed send and as I edited my post, overstepped the time limit.

Here is my entire post:

I think that we should be careful with making blanket statement about the EU, UK, and AZ spat. There are the EU, state governments, local politicians, media and millions of individual people. To take what one said and making it in the opinion of all those "stakeholders" seems to me a worrying trend on politic discourse/debate.

As for the EU suing AZ, in the many articles published I couldn't really found out what the EU hopes to archive with the lawsuit. My actual best guess I get information/answers they feel they didn't get in mediation.
Also we should remember that while the EU hasn't taken the option for 100 Mio additional doses, as of today, the contract for 300 Mio jabs is still stands

While the UK government should be lauded for the financial help (and by other means) for the development of the Oxford vaccine, and British citizens can, in my opinion, be rightfully pride of its development, I think our European friends should also take a little pride.
There are the over 300 Mio Euro given with the APA to ramp up production in the EU (as already discussed in this thread many pages ago). But more importantly not so long ago there was a world before Brexit. And according to the following link, over the last five years, until last summer, the EU was probably the largest provider of funds to the Jenner Insitute.
https://www.researchprofessionalnews.co ... institute/

Finaly this thread focuses on the EU. But we should not forget that AZ embarked in a massive production ramp up all over the world (factories in Australia, Japan, South Korea, India, EU, UK, US, Mexiko, Brazil, Argentina, and some I might have forgotten or not yet read about). Unfortunately it seems that the production ramp up hasn't got as planned at all those places. Having to fix problems all over the world, I think AZ's people are streached pretty thin and can't just focus all their problems on the EU factories. While regrettable for Europe, I belive it is important that production capacity are raised on all continents...

Best regards and stay safe,
Jonas

astuteman wrote:

tommy1808 wrote:

astuteman wrote:

You mean to say that half the planet's Pfizer production is dependent upon supplies being exported from the UK, and that the UK is not quite the complete parasite that its made out to be by our EU colleagues? Glad we got that straight..... Not quite as simple as the narrative is made out, is it?

Yup, a company in the UK won the initial contract for the lipids, still a EU wide tender at the time to find the best price point. Due to UK government action they may not get follow up orders, as it also led to massive orders from EU suppliers that started shipping in quantity just a few weeks ago. Heck, the German governments seem to be hell bend to have an entirely domestic vaccine supply chain to hand out an mRNA shot for its citizens every 6 weeks..... talk about overcompensating.

A fair point. AZ is more effective than no vaccine at all, though

very much so, and also quite a bit better than having just the Chinese vaccines on hand.

I assume this statement and the number is written from a European perspective.

Yes. The US already arrived at that point it would appear.

I think it is going to be a very long time before the whole of the planet is inundated with mRNA vaccines sufficient to discard the AZ. I don't think we're there yet..

In deed, that crossover point may be quite far out, depending on how many adapted boosters are needed. If its one shot/year like with flu vaccines mRMA capacity should probably happens sometimes next year. If vaccines need adapting vector based vaccines may be OBE anyhow, but that would of course lead to further supply shortage on the global stage.

best regards
Thomas

I am saddened to feel lumped together in that bucket

nah, you are not.

organisation that in good faith

Good faith isn´t what i would call selling exclusive access to the production of sites to two customers.

best regards
Thomas

astuteman wrote:

marcelh wrote:

Olddog wrote:

What reputational damage? Do you think the whole world is full of idiots that are unable to see who allowed vaccines to be exported and who like UK and US hoarded them?

This. A lot of people outside the EU still think it’s a union of “useful idiots”. People at this forum are bragging about how many people have been saved in the UK by the vaccination program and conveniently ignoring the fact that a lot of those vaccines were produced in the EU. Those are the same blaming the EU for being incompetent while AZ (part British) hasn’t been able to meet their contractual obligations by far. AZ was 90 million doses short by the end of March; those could have saved a lot of people (I personally know one of them, may he Rest In Peace).

There's a kite-flying feel to this that I'm not sure I understand, and that in my opinion is not reflected in the posting..

Who thinks the EU is a union of "useful idiots" - on this thread at least. Ignore the Express, Mail, and Boris's cronies.
Some of us have expressed concerns over certain aspects of the EU's vaccination journey, but then we've done the same to the UK and other countries.
As it stands, I think the EMA has been completely coherent in its approach.
Some of the member states, such as Germany and France seem to have gone their own way in some cases, and in doing so exhibited a less than coherent and conflicted approach to, for example, the AZ vaccine and how it should be used.
The head of the vaccine committee in Germany admitted that this had caused an issue
I get the feeling that is in the past now, as vaccination momentum build..

"Bragging" abut how many people have been saved in the UK?
Many lives have been saved. That's a fact.
Most of that discussion has been to support how effective the AZ vaccine is and that it should be respected as such.
And it should. It saves lives. Lots of them. "Bragging"?
Really unpleasant comment if I may say so

We all get that AZ have not met their contractual commitments.
We might question how robust the contract with the EU was compared to that with the UK and whether AZ have looked for an easy way out.
In the current circumstances, I would have thought that helping AZ get up to speed as much as possible would be the most appropriate response to maximise the supply of vaccine.
The legal case should follow when there is more stability in my opinion.

I agree, there's no doubt the AZ vaccines shipped to the UK would have saved lives in the EU
They did save lives in the UK
I wonder whether saving lives in the UK is seen as a less noble use of the vaccine than saving lives in the EU, and if so, why that is, and why it would be seen as "bragging" to say so?

If the legal action forces AZ out of the vaccination programme, that will be millions of lives around the world that won't be saved until the supply of other vaccines completely meets demand.
Is that really a good outcome?

Rgds

Interesting post, considering your earlier statements in this thread.

You are stating "Most of that discussion has been to support how effective the AZ vaccine is and that it should be respected as such.."

On March 21st I made a post about the blood clotting and you replied with:

"While your nations are busy showboating this "unease" with the AZ vaccine in a very highly politicised way, its been given to tens of millions of UK citizens since December with no issues whatsoever. Including me, my wife, my daughters (work in care), my sister, brother-in-law, mother, uncles, aunties, work colleagues, neighbours...... all AZ
No problems whatsoever
There is so much evidence of both its efficacy and its safety, that the "unease" can very clearly be seen, certainly this side of the channel, for what it is.

Your politicians have been too busy showboating amongst themselves and gaslighting their populations whilst their people are still dying.
That used to be our domain..... Not any more, it seems
Please don't quote contract numbers.
If I were AZ and looking to save as many lives as possible, I'd be delivering doses to governments that intended to use them.
They have my full support in that sense

Defending a ban on its use and moaning about its availability in the same breath is hypocritical, in my book
Like I've said before. If your country doesn't want them ......

"Unease"....
You'll find zero sympathy for this "unease" in the UK...."

Talking about an unpleasant comment.....



IMHO, AstraZenica should be used in the EU for everyone who wants to take the extremely small risk of 1:125,000, see also https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/british-regulator-says-astrazeneca-covid-shot-clots-rise-168-2021-04-22/. The faster we got vaccinated, the better. There are also EU members who still heavily depend on AZ (eg. Bulgaria), and need it ASAP. AstraZenica won't be the "first round sledge hammer" it was intended to be in the EU, but the world still needs the Oxford vaccine. Instead of helping AstraZenica, those in command should consider Merck as the primary producer of this vaccine.

An interesting read about Oxford, Merck and AstraZenica: https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-rejected-contracts-and-a-hollywood-movie-how-uk-struck-deal-to-guarantee-vaccine-supply-12204044

AirbusCheerlead wrote:

Sorry I accidentally pressed send and as I edited my post, overstepped the time limit.

Here is my entire post:

I think that we should be careful with making blanket statement about the EU, UK, and AZ spat. There are the EU, state governments, local politicians, media and millions of individual people. To take what one said and making it in the opinion of all those "stakeholders" seems to me a worrying trend on politic discourse/debate.

As for the EU suing AZ, in the many articles published I couldn't really found out what the EU hopes to archive with the lawsuit. My actual best guess I get information/answers they feel they didn't get in mediation.
Also we should remember that while the EU hasn't taken the option for 100 Mio additional doses, as of today, the contract for 300 Mio jabs is still stands

While the UK government should be lauded for the financial help (and by other means) for the development of the Oxford vaccine, and British citizens can, in my opinion, be rightfully pride of its development, I think our European friends should also take a little pride.
There are the over 300 Mio Euro given with the APA to ramp up production in the EU (as already discussed in this thread many pages ago). But more importantly not so long ago there was a world before Brexit. And according to the following link, over the last five years, until last summer, the EU was probably the largest provider of funds to the Jenner Insitute.
https://www.researchprofessionalnews.co ... institute/

Finaly this thread focuses on the EU. But we should not forget that AZ embarked in a massive production ramp up all over the world (factories in Australia, Japan, South Korea, India, EU, UK, US, Mexiko, Brazil, Argentina, and some I might have forgotten or not yet read about). Unfortunately it seems that the production ramp up hasn't got as planned at all those places. Having to fix problems all over the world, I think AZ's people are streached pretty thin and can't just focus all their problems on the EU factories. While regrettable for Europe, I belive it is important that production capacity are raised on all continents...

Best regards and stay safe,
Jonas

Really insightful, considered, balanced and considerate post, Jonas.
Should be considered an exemplar of the behaviours we should exhibit when society is in this level of crisis, IMO.
So many thanks

Rgds

tommy1808 wrote:

nah, you are not.

FWIW this feels a bit ambiguous

tommy1808 wrote:

Good faith isn´t what i would call selling exclusive access to the production of sites to two customers.

FWIW I was explicitly relating that comment to the original intent of the vaccine.
Can't disagree about the contracting scenario.
As per Jonas's post though, I wonder just how much attention was really given to the contracts with so much going on
No excuse, of course

Rgds

astuteman wrote:

Really insightful, considered, balanced and considerate post, Jonas.
Should be considered an exemplar of the behaviours we should exhibit when society is in this level of crisis, IMO.
So many thanks
Rgds

Thanks, right back at you. I always enjoyed reading your posts here and learnt a lot from them.

I have the feeling the vaccine development & ramp up, seen from the EU-UK lense, came at the worst possible moment as the two were in the final phase of their "divorce settlement" and divorce. Had Corona happend a little earlier the two would have been closer to the old ways, had it been a little later the two would have found their new rythme for collaboration, and in both cases I'm convinced we would have more jabs then we have now.

While politically I'm clearly left, I disagree with most and actually think that the Covid pandemic has shown that international cooperation and free trade works best for the world and humanity.

Best regards and stay safe,
Jonas

In the end AZ over promised by a lot. If you look at the combined orders, they barely delivered 30% of what was promised so far. And in the end it is in the best interest of the EU to get out of the contract, so that it can order additional doses from other supplier without having to take AZ doses if or when they become ready for delivery.

astuteman wrote:

tommy1808 wrote:

nah, you are not.

FWIW this feels a bit ambiguous

Its not, you have a nuanced view of AZ and the vaccination campaign in general, which is very refreshing.

FWIW I was explicitly relating that comment to the original intent of the vaccine.

That seems to have been the case at least in part, but it would also appear there wasn´t much other choice considering the UK government preferred a local producer over more experienced ones for being local.

best regards
Thomas

For me, I’m getting angrier at AZ as time goes on. I’m beginning to think that they have ripped off not just the EU, but the UK as well. There was an interesting comment from the EU vaccine commissioner Thierry Breton who had visited the Dutch factory that the UK claims it paid a large amount to set up a production line.

“Breton said the plant’s management had told him – contrary to some press reports – that it had received no UK government funding. Britain had nonetheless claimed a contractual right to the 7.5m doses a month it produced, later suggesting a 50/50 split.”

Full article here. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/ ... s-brussels

If what the Dutch factory owners say is correct, what has AZ done with the cash from the UK? More and more it feels like a massive fraud.

AirbusCheerlead wrote:

I have the feeling the vaccine development & ramp up, seen from the EU-UK lense, came at the worst possible moment as the two were in the final phase of their "divorce settlement" and divorce. Had Corona happend a little earlier the two would have been closer to the old ways, had it been a little later the two would have found their new rythme for collaboration, and in both cases I'm convinced we would have more jabs then we have now.

A more optimized cooperation between UK and EU post-referendum would only have happened when there wasn’t an Oxford vaccine and the UK was dependent on foreign (non UK) developed and produced vaccines.

Just because the UK didn’t wanted to be dependent is the reason the government invested in the developement of the Oxford vaccine, see also this article from January:
https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-rejected-contracts-and-a-hollywood-movie-how-uk-struck-deal-to-guarantee-vaccine-supply-12204044

It gives a very good insight in the choice of AstraZenica over Merck and also the challenges they had to meet.

Some interesting quotes:
” However, the real source of the government's confidence is its contract with AstraZeneca, which ministers believe commits the pharmaceutical company to delivering UK doses first - a fact confirmed by AstraZeneca boss Pascal Soriot in an interview with Italian newspaper La Repubblica.”

And the reason AstraZenica was chosen over Merck:

” The arrangement made sense. Unlike British-Swedish AstraZeneca, Merck had experience in making vaccines. Its senior executives have links to Oxford scientist and government adviser Sir John Bell.

Yet when the contract reached Matt Hancock's desk, the former adviser said, the health secretary refused to approve it, because it didn't include provisions specifically committing to supply the UK first.

The fear was export controls - not from the EU, but from the US. Mr Hancock was worried that president Trump would stop vaccines from Merck leaving the country.

And

” Reports have suggested that the Oxford scientists were unsure whether the deal with Merck had strong enough provisions for supplying poorer countries with vaccines. Mr Hancock's objection was more local and political. He wanted to make sure there was enough for UK citizens. The rest of the world could come later.”

So was Mr. Hancock correct about export controls, does he get a plus or minus for that line of thinking?

Germany, after 3 weeks of vaccinating (one jab = first and second) between 3.2 and 3.6 Mio people, seems to have accelerated again and should soon reach "May speed" when on average about 5 Mio people should get vaccinated weekly.

After vaccinating 772'274 people on April 14, Germany reached a new max on Tuesday (April 27) with 780'858 and topped it again yesterday with 1'088'952 people vaccinated.
http://www.impfdashboard.de

The numbers might change a little if you cheek the numbers tomorrow. The RKI (Robert Koch Institut) changes the numbers of daily addministred jabs a little every day (a few plus or minus). Even those for January...

To put the over 1 million people vaccinated in relation with Germany's population (about 83 Mio depending of the source):
US: about 4.35 Mio jabs
UK: about 0.85 Mio jabs

Best regards and stay safe,
Jonas

A quick add to my previous post:
Between first and second jab for both, Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna, the time laps has grown to about 4 weeks and 6 days.
I get the number by looking at the actual number of people that got fully vaccinated with a given vaccine and look for the day were less people had gotten their first jab.

For AZ only a few 2nd dose have been given (5.679 Mio first jab and only 36 thousand second jabs). AZ was approved February 8 and with 12 weeks between jabs we would get May 3 earliest for start 2nd jabs.

I can't provide a source since the data comes from my own excel. But all the data I use comes from the Robert Koch Institut. They have a daily data set that can be downloaded but that file gives only the actual data, hence I have the older data in my excel.
If someone is interested, I'm happy to share it.
http://www.rki.de

It seems that vaccines are starting to come en masse in France .
https://www.politico.eu/article/france- ... cine-glut/

Some Mayor's in my area started to vaccine everyone that wanted.

Think outside the box:
https://youtu.be/0JPRvxTjfOk

After Sputnik V, the EMA has started a rolling review for a second non western covid vaccine with Sinovac (Vero Cell)
https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/news/ema-s ... nactivated

Best regards and stay safe
Jonas

While still far behind, Germany has last week, with over 4.6 Mio people jabbed, for the first time, vaccinated more people per capita on a weekly base than the UK (supply limited) and US (demand limited).
It seems most EU states are on track for the mid July target (70% of adults fully vaccinated). At least supply wise, I'm hoping vaccine hesitancy starts kicking in later than in the US.

I have no direct source to link, but the data comes from the countries public available data:
https://impfdashboard.de/
https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/vaccinations
https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#vaccinations

AirbusCheerlead wrote:

While still far behind, Germany has last week, with over 4.6 Mio people jabbed, for the first time, vaccinated more people per capita on a weekly base than the UK (supply limited) and US (demand limited).
It seems most EU states are on track for the mid July target (70% of adults fully vaccinated). At least supply wise, I'm hoping vaccine hesitancy starts kicking in later than in the US.

I have no direct source to link, but the data comes from the countries public available data:
https://impfdashboard.de/
https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/vaccinations
https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#vaccinations

Vaccination in the EU has always been supply limited.

Macron just announced on TV that after 11 May everyone in rance could register and get a vaccine. So supply seems better.

Today EU Commissioner for Justice, Belgian D. Reynders gave an exclusive interview to Belgian public broadcaster VRT, in which he announced that the EU will no longer work with A-Z going forward; not only had the EU already decided not to make use of a call option on an additional 100m doses initially contractable as from June, there will also be no further orders for any future A-Z vaccines either, not even for possible still to be developed jabs against covid virus mutants in 2022/2023.

"A-Z is a totally unreliable partner and we do not want to work with such a company any longer."

As expected, this means exit A-Z in the EU.
I hope they bought massive political goodwill with the British government by actively conspiring with them against the EU, because the European Commission signed a contract for no less than 1.8BN additional doses with Pfizer fhrough 2023. That's a whole lot of revenue lost for A-Z.

https://www.vrt.be/vrtnws/nl/2021/05/09 ... -mei-2021/

The next next AZ shareholder meeting could be fun

The US don’t want AZ, “kaltgestellt” by the EU…… not exactly good PR…..
A well, our friends from the other side of the Noth Sea will frame it as “a hysterical political move to distract the attention from internal EU incompetence.”

Olddog wrote:

The next next AZ shareholder meeting could be fun

Wait till the modalities and consequences of the EU lawsuit against them are fully understood...

Not only their corporate reputation is completely trashed by their scandalous behaviour, also their balance sheet: the EC will make sure it really hurts.

All for the sake of a few tens of millions of jabs secretly exported to the UK ? ? ?

Whatever were they thinking?

sabenapilot wrote:

Olddog wrote:

The next next AZ shareholder meeting could be fun

Wait till the modalities and consequences of the EU lawsuit against them are fully understood...

Not only their corporate reputation is completely trashed by their scandalous behaviour, also their balance sheet: the EC will make sure it really hurts.

All for the sake of a few tens of millions of jabs secretly exported to the UK ? ? ?

Whatever were they thinking?

Until now there hasn’t been any legal ruling on the whole affair, but it seems you and the EU are already out for some payback as if there had been some kind of verdict.
I also find it childish to prematurely exclude AZ from future procurements. Who knows, maybe AZ will have something good in 2022 and 2023… Just shows how decision making at the EU is made.

DTVG wrote:

sabenapilot wrote:

Olddog wrote:

The next next AZ shareholder meeting could be fun

Wait till the modalities and consequences of the EU lawsuit against them are fully understood...

Not only their corporate reputation is completely trashed by their scandalous behaviour, also their balance sheet: the EC will make sure it really hurts.

All for the sake of a few tens of millions of jabs secretly exported to the UK ? ? ?

Whatever were they thinking?

Until now there hasn’t been any legal ruling on the whole affair, but it seems you and the EU are already out for some payback as if there had been some kind of verdict.
I also find it childish to prematurely exclude AZ from future procurements. Who knows, maybe AZ will have something good in 2022 and 2023… Just shows how decision making at the EU is made.

I don't know what standards companies rewarded with government contracts in the UK normally need to adhere to, but any company which can not deliver what it guaranteed by a factor 4 even and tries to hide this massive production shortfall from sight so the client can not order from competitors instead, is indeed not a partner worthy of any future business, so the EU rightfully took its mega order for 1.8 billion vaccines for 2022/2023 to Pfizer instead.

A-Z's Oxford vaccine is indeed finished off: in the US it never lifted off even, while in Europe it stalled on take-off... its reputation is truly trashed: good for third world use only, seems to be the first world's consensus.