Germany saying AZ vaccine only 8% effective in over 65s *MNHQ noting that this story has been widely debunked*

[dbIdb]

What fresh hell is this.

Why, why, why was the Oxford trial/data reporting so sloppy?

How has it come to this??

MRex - I was quite scathing and "what does he know about it?!" when Tony Blair suggested the dosage delay. Got fully behind it when Chris Whitty put his name to it though!

I don't know if Tony Blair said the roll out could be done in a couple of weeks, but I had a jaw drop when I read this earlier in the month www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/09/nhs-vaccinate-uk-covid-five-days-oxford-professor

So what’s going to happen now? Can the EU legally stop shipment of the vaccine to the UK? Can they take UK’s shipment for themselves? Will this end up in a legal battle?

www.repubblica.it/cronaca/2021/01/26/news/interview_pascal_soriot_ceo_astrazeneca_coronavirus_covid_vaccines-284349628/
Pascal Soriot: "There are a lot of emotions on vaccines in EU. But it's complicated"
An exclusive interview with AstraZeneca's CEO on the accusations from Europe after the delay of Oxford vaccine supplies, some revealing details of the vaccine contracts signed by Astrazeneca with Britain and EU ("no obligations, just best effort" for the latter), why Boris Johnson's government has taken some advantage and why the one-dose strategy is the "right one"

I'll let you read and decide whether his answers are sufficient.

I do note the following paragraph on specifics with the contract:
“The UK agreement was reached in June, three months before the European one. As you could imagine, the UK government said the supply coming out of the UK supply chain would go for the the UK first. Basically, that's how it is. In the EU agreement it is mentioned that the manufacturing sites in the UK were an option for Europe, but only later.

So the EU was to get priority supplies HOWEVER there appears to be a clause that this priority supply was NOT to come from the UK production sites initially.

And there then has subsequently been production issues at other production sites - particularly those earmarked for the bulk of EU production.

If thats true it does put things in a different light.

He also talks about the 8% claim. And he talks about the anti-vax movement.

I think he covers just about everything in there tbh.

www.repubblica.it/cronaca/2021/01/26/news/interview_pascal_soriot_ceo_astrazeneca_coronavirus_covid_vaccines-284349628/

Borrowed from another thread but relevant to this one too.
I actually feel very sorry for the AZ CEO after reading it!

@Baileysforchristmas

So what’s going to happen now? Can the EU legally stop shipment of the vaccine to the UK? Can they take UK’s shipment for themselves? Will this end up in a legal battle?

From the EU's POV, the UK is taking priority over their vaccine supply, that AZ signed up to deliver.

How would the UK react if the lion's share of AZ vaccine was going to the EU ?

As far as i can tell, AZ agreed to supply vaccine they couldn't be sure to be able too, why wasn't there caveats in the contract?

The bigger picture is that the EU and UK are going to become rivals and that won't end well.

@thatgingergirl - wow, he actually referred to the vaccine supply bit as bureaucracy. Like that isn't the major issue all over the world with all the vaccines.

As far as i can tell, AZ agreed to supply vaccine they couldn't be sure to be able too, why wasn't there caveats in the contract?

You mean caveats like the one the AZ CEO mentions in his interview?

Read the article posted @Iwantmysay and it has this info in. It was a best effort contract as signed 3 months after the U.K. one

@RedToothBrush

As far as i can tell, AZ agreed to supply vaccine they couldn't be sure to be able too, why wasn't there caveats in the contract?

You mean caveats like the one the AZ CEO mentions in his interview?

Absolutely, i didn't read your post or that article until i had posted. thankyou.

MRex - I loved the NHS spokesperson's dry response.

That Repubblica article is a humdinger.

So being reported EU won’t authorise for >65 yrs. confirmation Friday. This will cause a whole load of issues for U.K. if confirmed for obvious reasons.

@iwantmysay after reading RedtoothBrush link that isn’t what’s happened at all, it does sound like the EU are making a huge mistake here.

@Oaktree55

So being reported EU won’t authorise for >65 yrs. confirmation Friday. This will cause a whole load of issues for U.K. if confirmed for obvious reasons.

Why will it cause issues to the UK? Because they’ll be more inclined to hold onto the stock of Pfizer they have or because you think they know something we don’t?

@justanotherneighinparadise I’d imagine it’ll cause upset to those already vaccinated in U.K. and hesitancy for those due to be vaccinated.

@Oaktree55

So being reported EU won’t authorise for >65 yrs. confirmation Friday. This will cause a whole load of issues for U.K. if confirmed for obvious reasons.

Wouldn’t it cause more issues for EU citizens over 65? Delaying a vaccine for them?

Well it does look like the UK should still have enough doses made from the UK, fingers crossed 🤞

I don’t think it will cause a problem for over 65’s there isn’t any evidence it doesn’t produce enough immunity, the study was just done on 8% of people of that age bracket in the trials.

If they're not vaccinating over 65s with it then they won't need anything like so much so soon. Which will alleviate the impact of the initial supply issues.

Only if they have data to back up those claims.

If they’ve decided that based on not enough 65+ being included in the trial then that’s their decision. I guess it would make sense to then give the Pfizer or other to the over 65s and AZ to the younger population. But I don’t think it really means anything unless they can show their 8% efficacy figure is accurate.

I think the main issue to us is if they withhold the Pfizer vaccine. We’ve got a lot of people who need the second dose within a 12 week time frame. It would be reprehensible to withhold it from them and potentially cause deaths.

If they cite the reason as insufficient data as to why they can’t authorise then I’d imagine it’ll raise a few eyebrows here

Raise a few eyebrows mainly because it sounds like bullshit.

The 8% was Chinese Whispers it’s the percentage of elderly in trial not efficacy

@justanotherneighinparadise no they didn’t have many elderly in trial compared to other vaccines. That’s where the 8% erroneously came in. It’s been well known since the trial results came out.

Time is going to tell isn’t it 😬

@Oaktree55

If they cite the reason as insufficient data as to why they can’t authorise then I’d imagine it’ll raise a few eyebrows here

It’ll certainly cause issues with EU countries and their own vaccine roll outs. It seems from the euro press the last couple of days that many countries are relying on the AZ vaccine for much of their populations. I think some of these countries are going to be pissed off as they’ll now have to rearrange their roll outs to younger population first.

@Oaktree55 are you in the EU? If so would you take the Oxford vaccine after these claims?