To cry because one my my jabs is the unregistered AZ Indian one...

[Oxonschools]

And we are supposed to be going as a whole family, with the grandparents, to France on Sunday.

Does anyone know how I can find out if I will be let into France.

As I said, I don't think we should be treated differently to other "third" countries

So no problem then as the UK is being treated the same as any other third country. The manufacturing process is part of the approval process.

@OchonAgusOchonOh

As I said, I don't think we should be treated differently to other "third" countries

So no problem then as the UK is being treated the same as any other third country. The manufacturing process is part of the approval process.

The issue is not whether we are being treated differently to other "third" countries. It whether people who have been vaccinated with batches made in factories that while not inspected by the EMA have been inspected by agencies with similar standards including the FDA or MHRA should be treated as vaccinated. I think they should be and that the decision not to is political and nothing to do with public health or safety.

The issue is not whether we are being treated differently to other "third" countries. It whether people who have been vaccinated with batches made in factories that while not inspected by the EMA have been inspected by agencies with similar standards including the FDA or MHRA should be treated as vaccinated.

As it stands, the decision has been made to approve all EMA approved vaccines for entry. The next logical step would be to approve all WHO approved vaccines rather than doing so for individual agencies. If they were to do it by individual agency, they would need to make the decision on an agency by agency basis. That is not practical.

I expect a decision will be made to approve all WHO approved vaccines in time.

I think they should be and that the decision not to is political and nothing to do with public health or safety.

And I think the sensible approach is to start with EMA approved vaccines and then look at all WHO approved vaccines. All decisions are political. The decision will consider public health, resources required to do assessments, etc. Approving at the micro level (by agency) makes no sense from a cost or efficiency perspective. Approving at a macro level (WHO) does make sense.

There may be agreements in place with some other countries which cover this. Some sort of M.O.U. will mean they are not treated the same as a 3rd country without an M.O.U.

So, maybe inspections by the FDA are recognised. I don't know if that is the case. Just we have to bear in mind that other 3rd countries will have agreements in place that mean it is not the same relationship as with all other 3rd countries.

Yes, there is a Mutual Recognition Agreement between the EMA and the FDA. There is a list of countries with which there are cooperation and collaboration agreements in place.

www.ema.europa.eu/en/partners-networks/international-activities/bilateral-interactions-non-eu-regulators/united-states#mutual-recognition-agreement-and-gmp-compliance--section

This is a list of the countries with which the EMA have 'Bilateral interactions with non-EU regulators'.

www.ema.europa.eu/en/partners-networks/international-activities/bilateral-interactions-non-eu-regulators

As it stands, the decision has been made to approve all EMA approved vaccines for entry. The next logical step would be to approve all WHO approved vaccines rather than doing so for individual agencies. If they were to do it by individual agency, they would need to make the decision on an agency by agency basis. That is not practical.

The Astra Zenaca vaccine is approved by the EMA. The maufacturing facility in India hasn't been inspected by the EMA but it has been inspected by the MHRA and has completed the WHO Health Organisation Emergency Use Listing process. Therefore it would be entirely practical for EU countries to decide to accept Covisheild vaccinated people. The fact that most have demonstrates this!

@Belladonna12

As it stands, the decision has been made to approve all EMA approved vaccines for entry. The next logical step would be to approve all WHO approved vaccines rather than doing so for individual agencies. If they were to do it by individual agency, they would need to make the decision on an agency by agency basis. That is not practical.

The Astra Zenaca vaccine is approved by the EMA. The maufacturing facility in India hasn't been inspected by the EMA but it has been inspected by the MHRA and has completed the WHO Health Organisation Emergency Use Listing process. Therefore it would be entirely practical for EU countries to decide to accept Covisheild vaccinated people. The fact that most have demonstrates this!

The EMA approval does not include Covishield.

You are basically looking for the EU to make an exception to their processes for a vaccine that is approved in the UK but has not been approved in the EU. There is absolutely no reason they should do so, particularly as individual EU countries can make their own decision as to which they will allow (sovereignty, don't you know).

Why do you think they should make an exception for the UK? The UK is a third country and is being treated as such.

You are basically looking for the EU to make an exception to their processes for a vaccine that is approved in the UK but has not been approved in the EU. There is absolutely no reason they should do so, particularly as individual EU countries can make their own decision as to which they will allow (sovereignty, don't you know).

Why do you think they should make an exception for the UK? The UK is a third country and is being treated as such.

I am not saying that they should treat the UK as an exception at all. It would be wrong to treat travellers from other countries as if they were unvaccinated in this scenario too.

@Belladonna12

You are basically looking for the EU to make an exception to their processes for a vaccine that is approved in the UK but has not been approved in the EU. There is absolutely no reason they should do so, particularly as individual EU countries can make their own decision as to which they will allow (sovereignty, don't you know).

Why do you think they should make an exception for the UK? The UK is a third country and is being treated as such.

I am not saying that they should treat the UK as an exception at all. It would be wrong to treat travellers from other countries as if they were unvaccinated in this scenario too.

So you are saying they should make an exception for the UK and some other random list of countries.

Why would they expend time, effort and money doing that for third countries? They accept vaccines approved by the EMA at the moment. The next logical step would be to consider accepting those approved by WHO or all countries with whom they have an MUA.

Individual EU members can make their own decisions as to which they accept. However, the EU have stated all EMA approved vaccines are acceptable everywhere within the EU so any country that wishes to, can accept all those without having to do any further research/approvals.

Why would they expend time, effort and money doing that for third countries? They accept vaccines approved by the EMA at the moment. The next logical step would be to consider accepting those approved by WHO or all countries with whom they have an MUA.

Why would it involve time, effort and money to accept travellors who had been vaccinated with batches of AstraZenca, Pfizer or Moderna that had been manufactored by companies that had been inspected by the WHO or regulators with whom the EMA already have agreements in place?.

Why would it involve time, effort and money to accept travellors who had been vaccinated with batches of AstraZenca, Pfizer or Moderna that had been manufactored by companies that had been inspected by the WHO or regulators with whom the EMA already have agreements in place?.

Because you can't just say woo-hoo, let's take them all. You need to create a list of those that are acceptable. As I said, the next logical step is to accept all vaccines approved by the WHO. They haven't done that yet. That makes it more awkward for some third countries but them's the breaks.

@OchonAgusOchonOh

Why would it involve time, effort and money to accept travellors who had been vaccinated with batches of AstraZenca, Pfizer or Moderna that had been manufactored by companies that had been inspected by the WHO or regulators with whom the EMA already have agreements in place?.

Because you can't just say woo-hoo, let's take them all. You need to create a list of those that are acceptable. As I said, the next logical step is to accept all vaccines approved by the WHO. They haven't done that yet. That makes it more awkward for some third countries but them's the breaks.

They won't have to say "woohoo" lets take them all. There is already a list of agencies considered acceptable! In addition the EU have said that because the company is on the WHO Health Organisation Emergency Use List it is okay for countries to admit travellors that have been vaccinated with AstraZeneca manufactured by the Serum Institute of India It's the largest manufacturer of vaccines in the world.

@chocolatesaltyballs22

Having just flown to the Balearics I can tell you they're not even looking at this. All they want to see is your PLF.

@chocolatesaltyballs22 did you have any issues re your passport being in your maiden name and vaccine cert in married name?

Have a lovely time!

@foxandbee I didn't risk it - I asked the GP's surgery to change my name back so that it matched.

Thanks @chocolatesaltyballs22 - I might have to do the same.

They won't have to say "woohoo" lets take them all. There is already a list of agencies considered acceptable! In addition the EU have said that because the company is on the WHO Health Organisation Emergency Use List it is okay for countries to admit travellors that have been vaccinated with AstraZeneca manufactured by the Serum Institute of India It's the largest manufacturer of vaccines in the world.

There may be a list of agencies considered acceptable but it still requires time and effort to make the decision as to which ones to accept. It took time and effort to decide to give blanket acceptance to EMA approved vaccines only. It will take time and effort to decide to accept those approved by WHO and/or counties with MUAs. The other option is woo-hoo.

Anyway, this is going round in circles so I've made my point and will leave it there.

There may be a list of agencies considered acceptable but it still requires time and effort to make the decision as to which ones to accept.

You are not making sense. If they have a list of agencies they consider acceptable it's not going to take time and effort to consider which ones to accept. They can just use the list when considering which people can be considered vaccinated. No further effort required.

@Belladonna12

There may be a list of agencies considered acceptable but it still requires time and effort to make the decision as to which ones to accept.

You are not making sense. If they have a list of agencies they consider acceptable it's not going to take time and effort to consider which ones to accept. They can just use the list when considering which people can be considered vaccinated. No further effort required.

The vaccine passport is for EU citizens to prove their vaccine status, its not for UK citizens, you are being unreasonable to expect them to work around what we've chosen to do.

@Belladonna12

There may be a list of agencies considered acceptable but it still requires time and effort to make the decision as to which ones to accept.

You are not making sense. If they have a list of agencies they consider acceptable it's not going to take time and effort to consider which ones to accept. They can just use the list when considering which people can be considered vaccinated. No further effort required.

I will explain one last time - somebody put time and effort into deciding whether to just accept EMA approved vaccines or go broader. A decision was made - EMA only.

In order to go broader, time and effort needs to be spent in determining whether they should go broader, how much broader (MUAs only or WHO approval), determine the benefits and drawbacks of the various approaches etc. It is not a single individual sitting in an office who just decides off the top of their head what approach to take.

Anyway, even if they were to go by the list of agencies with MUAs, the UK is not listed on the link Cailleach1 provided so it wouldn't help anyone with this vaccine.

In order to go broader, time and effort needs to be spent in determining whether they should go broader, how much broader (MUAs only or WHO approval), determine the benefits and drawbacks of the various approaches etc. It is not a single individual sitting in an office who just decides off the top of their head what approach to take.

It may well be a few individuals sitting in a office deciding who to accept. If they do go into more detail it would take no more time to decide they will include countries with whom the EMA has agreements than they won't. There has to be thought and discusion either way.

Anyway, even if they were to go by the list of agencies with MUAs, the UK is not listed on the link Cailleach1 provided so it wouldn't help anyone with this vaccine.

The UK isn't on the list but some of the countries that have approved and used covishield are including Canada. Some of their citizens are in the same position.

The most pressing question is did @Oxonschools get to France? I hope so - if you did, perhaps you could advise how much notice the French border official took of your paperwork?! Are you currently quarantining or did they accept your jab?! (Asking for a friend )

@Panicmode1

The most pressing question is did *@Oxonschools* get to France? I hope so - if you did, perhaps you could advise how much notice the French border official took of your paperwork?! Are you currently quarantining or did they accept your jab?! (Asking for a friend )

👆🏼This! DC went to France via Eurostar last week. All checks done this side including not checking vaccine status.

I checked after this thread and I'm a 003.

I don't want to go abroad so it's immaterial to me, but hope OP gets to France.

@etinox thank you. Keeping my fingers and toes crossed, (whilst staying away from people to ensure we all have negative PCR tests.....!)

@Panicmode1 and anecdotally friends who travelled a few weeks back by ferry didn’t have their vaccine status checked.
Before the pile on- friend and DH were double vaccinated and could prove it. DC also double vaccinated but had letter from GP rather than app as the 2 vaccines were done in England and Scotland and the 2 systems don’t tally.