| Bit of protectionism from the EU here then. on 07:42 - Jan 26 with 2616 views | StokieBlue |
It's a bit out of order really, it's not even AZ that are the issue but a European company in Belgium. Even worse they are talking about expanding it to all vaccines produced in the EU. You can see their point but given they still haven't even approved the vaccine and are now in a row with Oxford and AZ about over 65 efficacy it does seem a bit unreasonable.
EU imploding a little bit over the vaccinations. First it was the Germans and Hungarians ignoring the centralised scheme rules and buying their own vaccines contrary to the agreement with other member states and now this.
SB |  |
| Avatar - IC410 - Tadpoles Nebula |
|  |
| Bit of protectionism from the EU here then. on 08:10 - Jan 26 with 2554 views | TractorWood |
The EU are having a mare on the vaccine and a starting to lose their heads. As SB says, they've not even approved the AZ vaccine and are moaning about efficacy at the same time as moaning about a delay in receiving it.
If our supply of Pfizer is affected will presumably have to litigate against Pfizer.
Good to see the spirit of collaboration for the greater good is alive and well. It would be really helpful if someone opened up their patent. Would save millions of lives but I appreciate that's not really how big Pharma works but AZ aren't even making a profit on theirs. |  |
| |
| Bit of protectionism from the EU here then. on 08:14 - Jan 26 with 2540 views | StokieBlue |
| Bit of protectionism from the EU here then. on 08:10 - Jan 26 by TractorWood |
The EU are having a mare on the vaccine and a starting to lose their heads. As SB says, they've not even approved the AZ vaccine and are moaning about efficacy at the same time as moaning about a delay in receiving it.
If our supply of Pfizer is affected will presumably have to litigate against Pfizer.
Good to see the spirit of collaboration for the greater good is alive and well. It would be really helpful if someone opened up their patent. Would save millions of lives but I appreciate that's not really how big Pharma works but AZ aren't even making a profit on theirs. |
It's worse than that, if they stop the export of Pfizer then we won't be able to give the second vaccination to the most vulnerable group and that has already been pushed back to 12 weeks without much evidence, not having it at all would be terrible.
The EU are eating themselves over this, Germany started it all by going behind the back of all other members and buying 30m doses of vaccine outside the agreed centralised purchase vehicle. All countries in the EU agreed not to do that.
SB | |
| Avatar - IC410 - Tadpoles Nebula |
| |
| Bit of protectionism from the EU here then. on 08:18 - Jan 26 with 2515 views | 26_Paz |
Disgraceful behaviour from the failed trading bloc |  |
| |
| Bit of protectionism from the EU here then. on 08:23 - Jan 26 with 2497 views | homer_123 |
| Bit of protectionism from the EU here then. on 08:14 - Jan 26 by StokieBlue |
It's worse than that, if they stop the export of Pfizer then we won't be able to give the second vaccination to the most vulnerable group and that has already been pushed back to 12 weeks without much evidence, not having it at all would be terrible.
The EU are eating themselves over this, Germany started it all by going behind the back of all other members and buying 30m doses of vaccine outside the agreed centralised purchase vehicle. All countries in the EU agreed not to do that.
SB |
Indeed - as I said in the OP - we could well be affected and the knock on effect could be terrible if we are unable to deliver the second dose.
Also pushes back, further, the relaxation of restrictions if the EUs stance affects supply of other vaccines as well. |  |
| |
| Bit of protectionism from the EU here then. on 08:33 - Jan 26 with 2472 views | hype313 |
The EU took 'options' as they wanted the French Vaccine to be a success, as well as not wanting to spend the money. The UK put the money up front.
Add the fact that the EU haven't even approved the AZ vaccine it's making them look very poor indeed, also not helping is the fact that Germany have independently bought 30m doses which will cause a few more internal arguments.
The EU have made a right pigs ear of this , and now we have the brexiteers saying 'told you so'. |  |
| |
| Bit of protectionism from the EU here then. on 08:39 - Jan 26 with 2449 views | WestStanderLaLaLa |
| Bit of protectionism from the EU here then. on 08:33 - Jan 26 by hype313 |
The EU took 'options' as they wanted the French Vaccine to be a success, as well as not wanting to spend the money. The UK put the money up front.
Add the fact that the EU haven't even approved the AZ vaccine it's making them look very poor indeed, also not helping is the fact that Germany have independently bought 30m doses which will cause a few more internal arguments.
The EU have made a right pigs ear of this , and now we have the brexiteers saying 'told you so'. |
The EU prepaid AZ for 300M vaccines and production. Further option for 100M. |  |
| |
| Bit of protectionism from the EU here then. on 08:45 - Jan 26 with 2424 views | Suffolktractor |
| Bit of protectionism from the EU here then. on 08:39 - Jan 26 by WestStanderLaLaLa |
The EU prepaid AZ for 300M vaccines and production. Further option for 100M. |
AZ can’t deliver the vaccine when it hasn’t even been approved! |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Bit of protectionism from the EU here then. on 08:48 - Jan 26 with 2406 views | Herbivore |
| Bit of protectionism from the EU here then. on 08:18 - Jan 26 by 26_Paz |
Disgraceful behaviour from the failed trading bloc |
I don't agree with the EU's actions, but let's be real here, if the UK was proposing to tighten up exports of the vaccine to help ensure its own orders were fulfilled you'd be loving it. You'd be justifying it on the grounds we need to look after our own, so long as our own doesn't include hungry school children, people of colour, or the LGBTQ community. So maybe step off your high horse and leave this kind of thing for the grown ups to talk about. |  |
| |
| Bit of protectionism from the EU here then. on 08:54 - Jan 26 with 2380 views | WestStanderLaLaLa |
| Bit of protectionism from the EU here then. on 08:45 - Jan 26 by Suffolktractor |
AZ can’t deliver the vaccine when it hasn’t even been approved! |
I was just pointing out they haven’t only taken options but have prepaid for a lot of vaccines. | |
| |
| Bit of protectionism from the EU here then. on 08:56 - Jan 26 with 2366 views | StokieBlue |
| Bit of protectionism from the EU here then. on 08:54 - Jan 26 by WestStanderLaLaLa |
I was just pointing out they haven’t only taken options but have prepaid for a lot of vaccines. |
Indeed.
However they decided and paid later than other countries and are now basically trying to force a jumping of the queue.
SB | |
| Avatar - IC410 - Tadpoles Nebula |
| |
| Bit of protectionism from the EU here then. on 08:58 - Jan 26 with 2349 views | homer_123 |
| Bit of protectionism from the EU here then. on 08:56 - Jan 26 by StokieBlue |
Indeed.
However they decided and paid later than other countries and are now basically trying to force a jumping of the queue.
SB |
The Pfizer situ is doubly interesting as well.
I wonder - did we place the order with Pfizer in the US? If so - we paid a US pharma company for the vaccine - that happens to be produced in Belgium and the EU might hold up/ make more difficult the export of that vaccine.
Not good. | |
| |
| Bit of protectionism from the EU here then. on 09:02 - Jan 26 with 2337 views | ArnoldMoorhen |
| Bit of protectionism from the EU here then. on 08:18 - Jan 26 by 26_Paz |
Disgraceful behaviour from the failed trading bloc |
In this thread I can see some Remainers criticising the EUs position on this.
It's possible to wish we were a member of the EU generally, and yet not support it unconditionally.
It's possible to be a supporter of a particular political position, and yet not feel the need to defend the indefensible.
You should try it some time. | | | |
| Bit of protectionism from the EU here then. on 09:40 - Jan 26 with 2270 views | Steve_M |
| Bit of protectionism from the EU here then. on 07:42 - Jan 26 by StokieBlue |
It's a bit out of order really, it's not even AZ that are the issue but a European company in Belgium. Even worse they are talking about expanding it to all vaccines produced in the EU. You can see their point but given they still haven't even approved the vaccine and are now in a row with Oxford and AZ about over 65 efficacy it does seem a bit unreasonable.
EU imploding a little bit over the vaccinations. First it was the Germans and Hungarians ignoring the centralised scheme rules and buying their own vaccines contrary to the agreement with other member states and now this.
SB |
On the efficacy for over 65s, it looks to be a catastrophic misunderstanding either by whoever briefed the journalists or the journalists:
I don't know enough to comment on the AZ part but did read that AZ has all it's production in the country of use so had the UK part failed then the UK would have the problem the EU now has. |  |
| |
| Bit of protectionism from the EU here then. on 09:44 - Jan 26 with 2245 views | StokieBlue |
| Bit of protectionism from the EU here then. on 09:40 - Jan 26 by Steve_M |
On the efficacy for over 65s, it looks to be a catastrophic misunderstanding either by whoever briefed the journalists or the journalists:
I don't know enough to comment on the AZ part but did read that AZ has all it's production in the country of use so had the UK part failed then the UK would have the problem the EU now has. |
That makes sense but doesn't seem to tally with what I heard on the World Tonight on Radio 4 last night. They were saying that the German health regulator had reservations about the efficacy for over 65's.
It was highly unlikely that it was the case that it didn't work, Oxford/AZ had looked at it specifically.
SB | |
| Avatar - IC410 - Tadpoles Nebula |
| |
| Bit of protectionism from the EU here then. on 09:46 - Jan 26 with 2232 views | MattinLondon |
| Bit of protectionism from the EU here then. on 09:02 - Jan 26 by ArnoldMoorhen |
In this thread I can see some Remainers criticising the EUs position on this.
It's possible to wish we were a member of the EU generally, and yet not support it unconditionally.
It's possible to be a supporter of a particular political position, and yet not feel the need to defend the indefensible.
You should try it some time. |
Careful, he’ll complain about being bullied. |  | | |
| Bit of protectionism from the EU here then. on 11:22 - Jan 26 with 2122 views | IpswichKnight |
| Bit of protectionism from the EU here then. on 09:44 - Jan 26 by StokieBlue |
That makes sense but doesn't seem to tally with what I heard on the World Tonight on Radio 4 last night. They were saying that the German health regulator had reservations about the efficacy for over 65's.
It was highly unlikely that it was the case that it didn't work, Oxford/AZ had looked at it specifically.
SB |
Not only that it was pier reviewed in the Lancet as well, it has also been passed by regulators in other countries. | | | |
| Bit of protectionism from the EU here then. on 11:33 - Jan 26 with 2084 views | hype313 |
| Bit of protectionism from the EU here then. on 11:22 - Jan 26 by IpswichKnight |
Not only that it was pier reviewed in the Lancet as well, it has also been passed by regulators in other countries. |
it's been confirmed today they they said 8% of cases rather than 8% efficacy, think I saw 20 cases out of 120000 in israel that were infected after vaccination. | |
| |
| Bit of protectionism from the EU here then. on 11:57 - Jan 26 with 2040 views | Kievthegreat |
Feels a bit to me that the EU is leaning Pfizer to get more of the AstraZeneca vaccine from the UK.
Seems to me that the EU are getting reduced numbers from AstraZeneca because of issues in Belgium and they want AstraZeneca to cover it with production from the UK (where some of the vaccine earmarked for them is made anyway). Reading between the lines, the EU is peeved that the UK seems to be getting it's full order while they will get substantially less. They can't force AstraZeneca to export more and so lean on Pfizer (with their own production woes) to keep a greater share and potentially reduce supplies to the UK until an agreement is hashed out to divert some AstraZeneca to even out the supply.
I still think it's a dick move, but a question for the posters in this thread. If AstraZeneca said they were reducing deliveries to the NHS to cover some of the shortfall in the EU (and the EU hadn't made their dick move WRT Pfizer), would you want the government to step in and prevent such exports until the UK got it's full share? |  | | |
| Bit of protectionism from the EU here then. on 12:10 - Jan 26 with 2011 views | Ryorry |
| Bit of protectionism from the EU here then. on 08:14 - Jan 26 by StokieBlue |
It's worse than that, if they stop the export of Pfizer then we won't be able to give the second vaccination to the most vulnerable group and that has already been pushed back to 12 weeks without much evidence, not having it at all would be terrible.
The EU are eating themselves over this, Germany started it all by going behind the back of all other members and buying 30m doses of vaccine outside the agreed centralised purchase vehicle. All countries in the EU agreed not to do that.
SB |
Not having sufficient supplies for the 2nd Pfizer vacc was always the fear, and one of the reasons why the govt. should always have held back enough stock to give the second dose of it to those who've had the first, instead of using up all or most of the stock they had onto as many individuals as poss for just the one round.
John Redwood is having a field day rubbing his hands with glee on twitter 🙄 |  |
| |
| Bit of protectionism from the EU here then. on 12:23 - Jan 26 with 1981 views | Ryorry |
| Bit of protectionism from the EU here then. on 11:57 - Jan 26 by Kievthegreat |
Feels a bit to me that the EU is leaning Pfizer to get more of the AstraZeneca vaccine from the UK.
Seems to me that the EU are getting reduced numbers from AstraZeneca because of issues in Belgium and they want AstraZeneca to cover it with production from the UK (where some of the vaccine earmarked for them is made anyway). Reading between the lines, the EU is peeved that the UK seems to be getting it's full order while they will get substantially less. They can't force AstraZeneca to export more and so lean on Pfizer (with their own production woes) to keep a greater share and potentially reduce supplies to the UK until an agreement is hashed out to divert some AstraZeneca to even out the supply.
I still think it's a dick move, but a question for the posters in this thread. If AstraZeneca said they were reducing deliveries to the NHS to cover some of the shortfall in the EU (and the EU hadn't made their dick move WRT Pfizer), would you want the government to step in and prevent such exports until the UK got it's full share? |
Let's face it, it would be the only benefit so far (and possibly for years to come) we get from Brexit, and would at least partly offset our otherwise disastrous leaving of the EU, so I for one will gratefully receive this benefit with open arms!
Despite that, it's depressing beyond belief that even in this huge global problem with affects every human being on the planet, we *still* can't actually work together in unison, beyond borders, for the best interests of us all collectively. Doesn't give much hope for preventing climate change calamity. Sorry for the pessimism :( | |
| |
| Bit of protectionism from the EU here then. on 12:27 - Jan 26 with 1977 views | Churchman |
| Bit of protectionism from the EU here then. on 08:58 - Jan 26 by homer_123 |
The Pfizer situ is doubly interesting as well.
I wonder - did we place the order with Pfizer in the US? If so - we paid a US pharma company for the vaccine - that happens to be produced in Belgium and the EU might hold up/ make more difficult the export of that vaccine.
Not good. |
I think the point you make is very interesting. Pfizer is an American company. If the EU start pressuring them to drop supplies in favour of EU countries I can see the EU running into all sorts of problems in all sorts of ways and not just with Pfizer.
The thing I find odd about the AstraZeneca argument is that the EU hasn’t even approved the vaccine and it’s toys are already being thrown out of the pram. The Germans now seem to be pumping rubbish info out on it to prepare the population with ‘well the vaccine doesn’t work anyway’ snow job.
The EU approvals process has proven slow, unwieldy and inadequate. They claim that they’re slower because they’re taking more care of their citizens. Yeah, right. Their procurement has been slow, inadequate and badly organised. Yet they’re heaping blame on the very companies that could provide salvation to the pandemic or at least help it and looking to putting it bluntly, queue jump.
These companies are large multinationals, their interests global. Even Sanofi is a multi national and is working in partnership with GSK, another huge company. It’s they, at this moment in time, that hold the cards. Not the EU. [Post edited 26 Jan 2021 12:38]
|  | | |
| Bit of protectionism from the EU here then. on 13:11 - Jan 26 with 1908 views | Herbivore |
| Bit of protectionism from the EU here then. on 11:57 - Jan 26 by Kievthegreat |
Feels a bit to me that the EU is leaning Pfizer to get more of the AstraZeneca vaccine from the UK.
Seems to me that the EU are getting reduced numbers from AstraZeneca because of issues in Belgium and they want AstraZeneca to cover it with production from the UK (where some of the vaccine earmarked for them is made anyway). Reading between the lines, the EU is peeved that the UK seems to be getting it's full order while they will get substantially less. They can't force AstraZeneca to export more and so lean on Pfizer (with their own production woes) to keep a greater share and potentially reduce supplies to the UK until an agreement is hashed out to divert some AstraZeneca to even out the supply.
I still think it's a dick move, but a question for the posters in this thread. If AstraZeneca said they were reducing deliveries to the NHS to cover some of the shortfall in the EU (and the EU hadn't made their dick move WRT Pfizer), would you want the government to step in and prevent such exports until the UK got it's full share? |
Precisely this. The likes of Paz would be at half mast if the UK put in place similar measures to try to ensure we got our order fulfilled. It's a dick move, but the kind of dick move Brexiteers would literally jizz themselves over if the boot was on the other foot. | |
| |
| Bit of protectionism from the EU here then. on 13:23 - Jan 26 with 1885 views | Pinewoodblue |
| Bit of protectionism from the EU here then. on 13:11 - Jan 26 by Herbivore |
Precisely this. The likes of Paz would be at half mast if the UK put in place similar measures to try to ensure we got our order fulfilled. It's a dick move, but the kind of dick move Brexiteers would literally jizz themselves over if the boot was on the other foot. |
Valneva, a French company I believe, have started producing vaccine at their Scottish plant thanks to funding from UK government. Results of trials should be available April.
Can you imagine the up roar in Europe if the UK government blocked supplies to the EU?
https://valneva.com/research-development/covid-19-vla2001/ |  |
| |
| Bit of protectionism from the EU here then. on 13:37 - Jan 26 with 1836 views | GlasgowBlue |
Fcuk the EU and Fcuk anyone who voted to stay in the EU  |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
