It would only be interesting, indeed astonishing, if such caveats weren't in the contract.
It is completely inconceivable that the contract wouldn't include lots of such caveats. There is absolutely no way AZ would have given a firm commitment on delivery dates for a brand-new vaccine, involving new production facilities and dependent on other suppliers who themselves were also doing things for the first time, all in a super-fast timescale.
As AZ CEO has continually stated the contract is based on best endeavors.
I'm actually surprised how polite he is being in public considering the games the EU seem to be playing.
I don't know what the EU think they're playing at. They really are in a negotiation where AZ hold all the cards. After all, if the EU get too bolshie AZ have the option to simply walk away from the contract, close their European factory and concentrate on other markets.
And there is exactly feck all the EU can do about it.
So the 'win' here for the EU is they accept a lower delivery than they want, and the lose is that they get none at all.
Wrong. The EU is one of the largest markets for pharmaceuticals in the world. That gives them a lot of muscle. AZ will not want to antagonise them more than necessary, so no, AZ do not hold all the cards, far from it.
So - just to be clear - the EU might ban AZ from operating in the EU altogether if they decide to abrogate a contract?
Which would cause no medicine shortages of any kind, I trust?
The EU are behaving like complete fools. It's like watching the DUP over Theresa May's deal - only worse, because you expect the DUP to behave like idiots.
Oh, and in case you didn't know, the UK government regularly tries to coerce companies, bully them if you like, by threats or inferences of lost contracts for those that don't tow the line
Isn't that the point? The EU cannot claim the high ground on government with escapades like this. The poor actions of others doesn't come into it.
The EU itself is obviously very reluctant to take the step of banning vaccine exports from the EU, so it needs to be seen to be doing its best to extract what it can from AZ. If it can't, then it may be forced by its member states to say, "sod the moral high ground" and fall back on its legislative power and economic might to get what it wants.
Well, at least you have clarified that the EU is a bully,
The EU project as a whole is hardly undermined by poor behaviour and actions on this issue, but the retreat into pettiness, overt threats and denials to evade responsibility has not been edifying, even though it shows how it really had developed into a proper government, for better and in this case worse.
The EU project may not be undermined but it is revealing to all the problems that have always existed.
European sclerosis has been a critical failing for decades but many have denied that it is a problem ... only to be seeing what it means in real time now.
The EU's astounding shitness and bullying on this issue is ironically giving Boris enormous political cover on both Brexit and the pandemic response at the same time! Trying to steal our vaccines will raise the blood pressure of most fair-minded Brits, no matter what their political alignment might be.
Given we're assessing what the EU has screwed up, it's just a plain judgement. One that everybody, including people living in the EU, except EU bureaucrats seem to share.
Best performing countries for Covid vaccine doses given out:
Israel (9.05 million) 47.90 per 100 population UAE (9.77 million) 27.107 per 100 population United Kingdom (67 million) 10.79 per 100 population
...
European Union (446 million) 2.11 per 100 population
Still @Nigel_Foremain reckons "big" "muscle" works when it comes to pharmaceuticals. "Big" doesn't work. "Muscle" doesn't work.
Small countries nimbly looking after themselves works.
Bear in mind, that % covers the entire population. But 21% of the UK population is under 18. So, as we have no plans to vaccinate Da Yoof yet, we have actually jabbed 10.79m of the total 53m pool - we have done over 20% of the adult population of the UK.
And we have probably jabbed a million more by now - so we are at 22.5% as of this moment.
How can you stockpile something you haven't yet made.....i want my Nvidia 3080Ti....why haven't they been stockpiling them.....what do you mean they don't exist yet.
I'm afraid those Bitcoin miners got in about three months before you.
How can you stockpile something you haven't made.....i want my Nvidia 3080Ti....why aren't they stockpiling them.....
What we are seeing here is the difference between what a politician says "we've got 100 million doses" and what has actually been agreed, a contract to produce 100 million doses.
Best performing countries for Covid vaccine doses given out:
Israel (9.05 million) 47.90 per 100 population UAE (9.77 million) 27.107 per 100 population United Kingdom (67 million) 10.79 per 100 population
...
European Union (446 million) 2.11 per 100 population
Still @Nigel_Foremain reckons "big" "muscle" works when it comes to pharmaceuticals. "Big" doesn't work. "Muscle" doesn't work.
Small countries nimbly looking after themselves works.
Bear in mind, that % covers the entire population. But 21% of the UK population is under 18. So, as we have no plans to vaccinate Da Yoof yet, we have actually jabbed 10.79m of the total 53m pool - we have done over 20% of the adult population of the UK.
And we have probably jabbed a million more by now - so we are at 22.5% as of this moment.
Half-jabbed...
Which we are repeatedly told confer the majority of the protection.
Best performing countries for Covid vaccine doses given out:
Israel (9.05 million) 47.90 per 100 population UAE (9.77 million) 27.107 per 100 population United Kingdom (67 million) 10.79 per 100 population
...
European Union (446 million) 2.11 per 100 population
Still @Nigel_Foremain reckons "big" "muscle" works when it comes to pharmaceuticals. "Big" doesn't work. "Muscle" doesn't work.
Small countries nimbly looking after themselves works.
Bear in mind, that % covers the entire population. But 21% of the UK population is under 18. So, as we have no plans to vaccinate Da Yoof yet, we have actually jabbed 10.79m of the total 53m pool - we have done over 20% of the adult population of the UK.
And we have probably jabbed a million more by now - so we are at 22.5% as of this moment.
Half-jabbed...
No, jabbed.
Not double jabbed. Unless the needle only went in halfway?
It would only be interesting, indeed astonishing, if such caveats weren't in the contract.
It is completely inconceivable that the contract wouldn't include lots of such caveats. There is absolutely no way AZ would have given a firm commitment on delivery dates for a brand-new vaccine, involving new production facilities and dependent on other suppliers who themselves were also doing things for the first time, all in a super-fast timescale.
As AZ CEO has continually stated the contract is based on best endeavors.
I'm actually surprised how polite he is being in public considering the games the EU seem to be playing.
I don't know what the EU think they're playing at. They really are in a negotiation where AZ hold all the cards. After all, if the EU get too bolshie AZ have the option to simply walk away from the contract, close their European factory and concentrate on other markets.
And there is exactly feck all the EU can do about it.
So the 'win' here for the EU is they accept a lower delivery than they want, and the lose is that they get none at all.
Wrong. The EU is one of the largest markets for pharmaceuticals in the world. That gives them a lot of muscle. AZ will not want to antagonise them more than necessary, so no, AZ do not hold all the cards, far from it.
So - just to be clear - the EU might ban AZ from operating in the EU altogether if they decide to abrogate a contract?
Which would cause no medicine shortages of any kind, I trust?
The EU are behaving like complete fools. It's like watching the DUP over Theresa May's deal - only worse, because you expect the DUP to behave like idiots.
Oh, and in case you didn't know, the UK government regularly tries to coerce companies, bully them if you like, by threats or inferences of lost contracts for those that don't tow the line
Isn't that the point? The EU cannot claim the high ground on government with escapades like this. The poor actions of others doesn't come into it.
The EU itself is obviously very reluctant to take the step of banning vaccine exports from the EU, so it needs to be seen to be doing its best to extract what it can from AZ. If it can't, then it may be forced by its member states to say, "sod the moral high ground" and fall back on its legislative power and economic might to get what it wants.
Well, at least you have clarified that the EU is a bully,
The worst thing to have is an impotent bully.
When people stand up to a bully very often it reveals the attempted bully is actually weak and powerless.
How can you stockpile something you haven't yet made.....i want my Nvidia 3080Ti....why haven't they been stockpiling them.....what do you mean they don't exist yet.
I'm afraid those Bitcoin miners got in about three months before you.
3080Ti has even been produced yet. Combination of demand for regular lines of 3070/3080s and time taken to get a new 8nm production line under contract with Samsung up to speed to produce these new highest end variants... sound familiar...
If GOP senators don't bar him from office he will be running in 2024.
I'm not sure I agree for several reasons, although accept it's a serious possibility.
Obstacles include:
1. He has serious legal and possibly financial problems separate from impeachment.
2. He is deeply personal hurt by defeat and won't run if he doesn't think he'll win.
3. Many of his biggest defenders don't want him to stand due either to personal ambition or a belief he won't win - they will stand by him but remind him of 2.
4. He will be 78. Whilst he seems in surprisingly robust form for a man with his risk factors, and it didn't stop Biden, quite a lot can happen medically in four years in your late 70s if you're obese and so on.
It's fascinating. The GOP is infected by far right populism going by the name of MAGA. If they split into GOP and MAGA, the Dems win. If they don't split they have to either purge MAGA or become MAGA. But they can't purge MAGA without fostering the split which they must avoid. Ergo they must become MAGA. But MAGA can't work under a career politician. It needs a charismatic celebrity outsider to front it. That's an essential part of its USP. It needs Donald Trump. But Donald Trump will not be standing for all of the reasons you list and more. So, if they go this route, who will it be? Tucker Carlson? Alex Jones? This has the feel of a series of logic steps, each impeccable, leading to a ludicrous conclusion. Which is one of the reasons it is so fascinating.
At the time, everyone thought Donald Trump being President was an absolute joke. What seems ludicrous now may be obvious in hindsight.
And Carlson, for instance, is sufficiently intelligent and superficially plausible to be extremely dangerous.
He's quite a short price - so that is not just your view.
He's one of the few nutters who can present as a normal human being.
I would not be laying him for the nomination unless the odds get shorter still.
Just laying Trump and Cruz atm.
There isn't a lot of liquidity in the market at the moment but, as it gets more active, I think the value in the Republican nominee market will be in laying the leading names.
Exchange odds will tend to reflect buzz being generated but, for a really ambitious Republican, the best thing to do is to keep a reasonably low media profile while the internal war rages before emerging as a fresh "new" Republican (whatever the definition of that eventually becomes) in 2022.
That's not to say there's zero chance of Hawley, or Carlson or whoever emerging. They are ambitious and loud, and may come through. But I think they'll be unrealistically short in the betting due to buzz, then drift later as the quieter ones come in, before perhaps coming back in if they survive - so a trading lay early on.
I cannot believe Boris achieved that "man of sorrows and acquainted with grief" look in the Mail photograph without hours of practise and coaching. This is all orchestrated to take a hit, get it out of the way, preempt an attack from Sir Abstainalot at pmq and clear the decks for a sunlit uplands narrative as the vaccine kicks in.
I actually do not accept that
He is featured in all todays papers and each photo is different but shows him deeply affected
I have no reason to think that the enormity of this pandemic and consequences does not genuinely upset him
I have reason to think that the enormity of this pandemic and consequences does not genuinely upset him.
Even if he does it does not condone for a second his uselessness overall or the bunch of cretins he has as a team. Their only quick actions were filling their pals pockets with public money , everything else was a shambles. These guys are culpable 100%
Sturgeon, Drakeford and Foster are equally and jointly responsible with Boris for mistakes made
Keep trying G, you just cannot see past Boris. Sturgeon may have made some mistakes , but miles ahead of Boris and often had little option but to do as Westminster said, she had to beg for money at every turn.
As well as lots of caveats around 'best endeavours, I bet there are two further conditions in the AZ-EU contract:
1. 'Subject to approval by the EMA', which would be an interesting one to bring into the mix.
2. A clause stipulating that AZ won't favour other clients over the EU. The EU might think this gives them the right to dip into our supplies, but I doubt whether a proper reading of the various contracts would support that, assuming the AZ lawyers know what they are doing (which is a very, very good assumption).
Best performing countries for Covid vaccine doses given out:
Israel (9.05 million) 47.90 per 100 population UAE (9.77 million) 27.107 per 100 population United Kingdom (67 million) 10.79 per 100 population
...
European Union (446 million) 2.11 per 100 population
Still @Nigel_Foremain reckons "big" "muscle" works when it comes to pharmaceuticals. "Big" doesn't work. "Muscle" doesn't work.
Small countries nimbly looking after themselves works.
Bear in mind, that % covers the entire population. But 21% of the UK population is under 18. So, as we have no plans to vaccinate Da Yoof yet, we have actually jabbed 10.79m of the total 53m pool - we have done over 20% of the adult population of the UK.
And we have probably jabbed a million more by now - so we are at 22.5% as of this moment.
Half-jabbed...
No, jabbed.
Not double jabbed. Unless the needle only went in halfway?
How can you stockpile something you haven't yet made.....i want my Nvidia 3080Ti....why haven't they been stockpiling them.....what do you mean they don't exist yet.
I'm afraid those Bitcoin miners got in about three months before you.
3080Ti has even been produced yet. Combination of demand for regular lines of 3070/3080s and time taken to get a new 8nm production line under contract with Samsung up to speed to produce these new highest end variants... sound familiar...
Worth saying (and I forgot this yesterday) 1 UK computer parts supplier has 5000 paid for outstanding 3080 orders.
As well as lots of caveats around 'best endeavours, I bet there are two further conditions in the AZ-EU contract:
1. 'Subject to approval by the EMA', which would be an interesting one to bring into the mix.
2. A clause stipulating that AZ won't favour other clients over the EU. The EU might think this gives them the right to dip into our supplies, but I doubt whether a proper reading of the various contracts would support that, assuming the AZ lawyers know what they are doing (which is a very, very good assumption).
I mean it is a bunch of half-rate politicians that couldn't make it in national politics vs. lawyers that probably charge thousands an hour.
It’s almost as though the E.U., aggravated that Britain has found one benefit from Brexit so soon after leaving, are trying to act as dog in the manger to show that actually, even benefits are not benefits.
I’m sure that’s not what they’re really doing - they’re more likely just in a complete panic at having cocked up - but they could hardly be doing a better job if it was.
Best performing countries for Covid vaccine doses given out:
Israel (9.05 million) 47.90 per 100 population UAE (9.77 million) 27.107 per 100 population United Kingdom (67 million) 10.79 per 100 population
...
European Union (446 million) 2.11 per 100 population
Still @Nigel_Foremain reckons "big" "muscle" works when it comes to pharmaceuticals. "Big" doesn't work. "Muscle" doesn't work.
Small countries nimbly looking after themselves works.
Bear in mind, that % covers the entire population. But 21% of the UK population is under 18. So, as we have no plans to vaccinate Da Yoof yet, we have actually jabbed 10.79m of the total 53m pool - we have done over 20% of the adult population of the UK.
And we have probably jabbed a million more by now - so we are at 22.5% as of this moment.
Half-jabbed...
Which we are repeatedly told confer the majority of the protection.
Yes, we are repeatedly told that in the UK. A wing and a prayer springs to mind.
Clever from SKS asking for early vaccination of teachers.
Boris may well have planned that anyway but now will find it challenging to do so.
It's a good idea - if he wasn't, he should do so and thank Keir (and me of course, last week) for the idea. It can't harm Boris to be seen to be listening.
Best performing countries for Covid vaccine doses given out:
Israel (9.05 million) 47.90 per 100 population UAE (9.77 million) 27.107 per 100 population United Kingdom (67 million) 10.79 per 100 population
...
European Union (446 million) 2.11 per 100 population
Still @Nigel_Foremain reckons "big" "muscle" works when it comes to pharmaceuticals. "Big" doesn't work. "Muscle" doesn't work.
Small countries nimbly looking after themselves works.
Bear in mind, that % covers the entire population. But 21% of the UK population is under 18. So, as we have no plans to vaccinate Da Yoof yet, we have actually jabbed 10.79m of the total 53m pool - we have done over 20% of the adult population of the UK.
And we have probably jabbed a million more by now - so we are at 22.5% as of this moment.
Half-jabbed...
Which we are repeatedly told confer the majority of the protection.
Yes, we are repeatedly told that in the UK. A wing and a prayer springs to mind.
It would only be interesting, indeed astonishing, if such caveats weren't in the contract.
It is completely inconceivable that the contract wouldn't include lots of such caveats. There is absolutely no way AZ would have given a firm commitment on delivery dates for a brand-new vaccine, involving new production facilities and dependent on other suppliers who themselves were also doing things for the first time, all in a super-fast timescale.
As AZ CEO has continually stated the contract is based on best endeavors.
I'm actually surprised how polite he is being in public considering the games the EU seem to be playing.
I don't know what the EU think they're playing at. They really are in a negotiation where AZ hold all the cards. After all, if the EU get too bolshie AZ have the option to simply walk away from the contract, close their European factory and concentrate on other markets.
And there is exactly feck all the EU can do about it.
So the 'win' here for the EU is they accept a lower delivery than they want, and the lose is that they get none at all.
Wrong. The EU is one of the largest markets for pharmaceuticals in the world. That gives them a lot of muscle. AZ will not want to antagonise them more than necessary, so no, AZ do not hold all the cards, far from it.
So - just to be clear - the EU might ban AZ from operating in the EU altogether if they decide to abrogate a contract?
Which would cause no medicine shortages of any kind, I trust?
The EU are behaving like complete fools. It's like watching the DUP over Theresa May's deal - only worse, because you expect the DUP to behave like idiots.
The EU feels that AZ have legged them over. So they are making a fuss. A resolution will be found that puts the EU in a better position than if they had not made a fuss. This is what I predict. Bet I'm right.
At the detriment to who?
I fear it might be you, Rob. But let's hope not.
It was a legitimate question. The EU are seeking to divert supplies rightfully destined for the UK.
Not really. That's a simplistic and jaundiced view. They are "rightfully" seeking to reduce their shortfall. In general, with fixed vaccine supply, every shot someone has means somebody else did not have it. Why are we diverting jabs from Italy? Why is Israel diverting jabs from us? Etc. It all depends on the contracts, the money, the moral view, the WHO, the balance of power, the politics etc etc. Bottom line is as I summarized and people should stop sanctimoniously moaning unless and until something that warrants it occurs. Which it hasn't yet. All that's happening is a frenzy of europhobes mutually wanking each other off and wallowing in europhobia. I'm finding it infantile and tedious.
It’s almost as though the E.U., aggravated that Britain has found one benefit from Brexit so soon after leaving, are trying to act as dog in the manger to show that actually, even benefits are not benefits.
I’m sure that’s not what they’re really doing - they’re more likely just in a complete panic at having cocked up - but they could hardly be doing a better job if it was.
Hang on. The MRHA said that Brexit was not the reason for Britain being ahead on vaccines, either approval or procurement.
Best performing countries for Covid vaccine doses given out:
Israel (9.05 million) 47.90 per 100 population UAE (9.77 million) 27.107 per 100 population United Kingdom (67 million) 10.79 per 100 population
...
European Union (446 million) 2.11 per 100 population
Still @Nigel_Foremain reckons "big" "muscle" works when it comes to pharmaceuticals. "Big" doesn't work. "Muscle" doesn't work.
Small countries nimbly looking after themselves works.
Bear in mind, that % covers the entire population. But 21% of the UK population is under 18. So, as we have no plans to vaccinate Da Yoof yet, we have actually jabbed 10.79m of the total 53m pool - we have done over 20% of the adult population of the UK.
And we have probably jabbed a million more by now - so we are at 22.5% as of this moment.
Half-jabbed...
Which we are repeatedly told confer the majority of the protection.
According to the interview with the head of AZ it offers complete protection against severe disease.
"First of all, we believe that the efficacy of one dose is sufficient: 100 percent protection against severe disease and hospitalisation"
That is the key number people should be hearing, whether its 60%, 70% or 90% efficient at preventing mild illness or even asymptomatic illness is not the same level of importance.
As well as lots of caveats around 'best endeavours, I bet there are two further conditions in the AZ-EU contract:
1. 'Subject to approval by the EMA', which would be an interesting one to bring into the mix.
2. A clause stipulating that AZ won't favour other clients over the EU. The EU might think this gives them the right to dip into our supplies, but I doubt whether a proper reading of the various contracts would support that, assuming the AZ lawyers know what they are doing (which is a very, very good assumption).
I mean it is a bunch of half-rate politicians that couldn't make it in national politics vs. lawyers that probably charge thousands an hour.
But it's "big, muscly" half rate politicians like Von Der Leyen versus lawyers that probably charge thousands an hour. 😂
It would only be interesting, indeed astonishing, if such caveats weren't in the contract.
It is completely inconceivable that the contract wouldn't include lots of such caveats. There is absolutely no way AZ would have given a firm commitment on delivery dates for a brand-new vaccine, involving new production facilities and dependent on other suppliers who themselves were also doing things for the first time, all in a super-fast timescale.
As AZ CEO has continually stated the contract is based on best endeavors.
I'm actually surprised how polite he is being in public considering the games the EU seem to be playing.
I don't know what the EU think they're playing at. They really are in a negotiation where AZ hold all the cards. After all, if the EU get too bolshie AZ have the option to simply walk away from the contract, close their European factory and concentrate on other markets.
And there is exactly feck all the EU can do about it.
So the 'win' here for the EU is they accept a lower delivery than they want, and the lose is that they get none at all.
Wrong. The EU is one of the largest markets for pharmaceuticals in the world. That gives them a lot of muscle. AZ will not want to antagonise them more than necessary, so no, AZ do not hold all the cards, far from it.
So - just to be clear - the EU might ban AZ from operating in the EU altogether if they decide to abrogate a contract?
Which would cause no medicine shortages of any kind, I trust?
The EU are behaving like complete fools. It's like watching the DUP over Theresa May's deal - only worse, because you expect the DUP to behave like idiots.
Oh, and in case you didn't know, the UK government regularly tries to coerce companies, bully them if you like, by threats or inferences of lost contracts for those that don't tow the line
Isn't that the point? The EU cannot claim the high ground on government with escapades like this. The poor actions of others doesn't come into it.
The EU itself is obviously very reluctant to take the step of banning vaccine exports from the EU, so it needs to be seen to be doing its best to extract what it can from AZ. If it can't, then it may be forced by its member states to say, "sod the moral high ground" and fall back on its legislative power and economic might to get what it wants.
Well, at least you have clarified that the EU is a bully,
As I've said over the past few days, the veil has come off and people are seeing what the rest of us realised a long time ago. The EU isn't our friend or our ally, it is a trading partner and an unreliable one at that. Individual nations within the EU may vary their relationship a bit, but ultimately the EU-UK relationship needs to be seen through the lens of trade, not friendship as we would say for our relationship with the US or Australia.
Best performing countries for Covid vaccine doses given out:
Israel (9.05 million) 47.90 per 100 population UAE (9.77 million) 27.107 per 100 population United Kingdom (67 million) 10.79 per 100 population
...
European Union (446 million) 2.11 per 100 population
Still @Nigel_Foremain reckons "big" "muscle" works when it comes to pharmaceuticals. "Big" doesn't work. "Muscle" doesn't work.
Small countries nimbly looking after themselves works.
Bear in mind, that % covers the entire population. But 21% of the UK population is under 18. So, as we have no plans to vaccinate Da Yoof yet, we have actually jabbed 10.79m of the total 53m pool - we have done over 20% of the adult population of the UK.
And we have probably jabbed a million more by now - so we are at 22.5% as of this moment.
You've jumbled up your figures. You've taken "10.79", which was a percentage, and turned it into an amount in millions, then converted that back to a percentage of 53m adult population.
The UK population (in 2019) was 66,796,807 The under 18s were 14,856,441
Which makes a proportion of 22.24%
The over 18 population is thus 51,940,366
The latest 1st dose number is 6,853,327
So the percentage of over 18s vaccinated is 13.19% The percentage of the total population is 10.26%
I think......
It's not clear to me why any nations' numbers are expressed as a percentage of the total population. Children are not part of the vaccination cohort anywhere as far as I know (indeed have any vaxes even been approved for paediatric use? Not that I know of).
This of course makes good sense. The threat to children from Covid-19 is vanishingly small, so it makes sense to exclude them.
But all figures from all nations should therefore be expressed as a percentage of the eligible population, not the total population.
It would only be interesting, indeed astonishing, if such caveats weren't in the contract.
It is completely inconceivable that the contract wouldn't include lots of such caveats. There is absolutely no way AZ would have given a firm commitment on delivery dates for a brand-new vaccine, involving new production facilities and dependent on other suppliers who themselves were also doing things for the first time, all in a super-fast timescale.
As AZ CEO has continually stated the contract is based on best endeavors.
I'm actually surprised how polite he is being in public considering the games the EU seem to be playing.
I don't know what the EU think they're playing at. They really are in a negotiation where AZ hold all the cards. After all, if the EU get too bolshie AZ have the option to simply walk away from the contract, close their European factory and concentrate on other markets.
And there is exactly feck all the EU can do about it.
So the 'win' here for the EU is they accept a lower delivery than they want, and the lose is that they get none at all.
Wrong. The EU is one of the largest markets for pharmaceuticals in the world. That gives them a lot of muscle. AZ will not want to antagonise them more than necessary, so no, AZ do not hold all the cards, far from it.
So - just to be clear - the EU might ban AZ from operating in the EU altogether if they decide to abrogate a contract?
Which would cause no medicine shortages of any kind, I trust?
The EU are behaving like complete fools. It's like watching the DUP over Theresa May's deal - only worse, because you expect the DUP to behave like idiots.
Oh, and in case you didn't know, the UK government regularly tries to coerce companies, bully them if you like, by threats or inferences of lost contracts for those that don't tow the line
Isn't that the point? The EU cannot claim the high ground on government with escapades like this. The poor actions of others doesn't come into it.
The EU itself is obviously very reluctant to take the step of banning vaccine exports from the EU, so it needs to be seen to be doing its best to extract what it can from AZ. If it can't, then it may be forced by its member states to say, "sod the moral high ground" and fall back on its legislative power and economic might to get what it wants.
Well, at least you have clarified that the EU is a bully,
Whether the EU is a bully or not is completely immaterial. If it chooses to make use of its rather substantial political and economic muscle, there's very little we can do about it (other than call them names).
Clever from SKS asking for early vaccination of teachers.
Boris may well have planned that anyway but now will find it challenging to do so.
It's a good idea - if he wasn't, he should do so and thank Keir (and me of course, last week) for the idea. It can't harm Boris to be seen to be listening.
It opens a can of worms. There are lots and lots of people who could have a legitimate claim to special treatment.
If the government agrees to one claim, then suddenly there will be thousands if not millions of others...
Best performing countries for Covid vaccine doses given out:
Israel (9.05 million) 47.90 per 100 population UAE (9.77 million) 27.107 per 100 population United Kingdom (67 million) 10.79 per 100 population
...
European Union (446 million) 2.11 per 100 population
Still @Nigel_Foremain reckons "big" "muscle" works when it comes to pharmaceuticals. "Big" doesn't work. "Muscle" doesn't work.
Small countries nimbly looking after themselves works.
Bear in mind, that % covers the entire population. But 21% of the UK population is under 18. So, as we have no plans to vaccinate Da Yoof yet, we have actually jabbed 10.79m of the total 53m pool - we have done over 20% of the adult population of the UK.
And we have probably jabbed a million more by now - so we are at 22.5% as of this moment.
Half-jabbed...
Which we are repeatedly told confer the majority of the protection.
Yes, we are repeatedly told that in the UK. A wing and a prayer springs to mind.
So now we shouldn't listen to the scientists?
I can't help but think Foxy's responses are coloured by which party is currently in power.
It would only be interesting, indeed astonishing, if such caveats weren't in the contract.
It is completely inconceivable that the contract wouldn't include lots of such caveats. There is absolutely no way AZ would have given a firm commitment on delivery dates for a brand-new vaccine, involving new production facilities and dependent on other suppliers who themselves were also doing things for the first time, all in a super-fast timescale.
As AZ CEO has continually stated the contract is based on best endeavors.
I'm actually surprised how polite he is being in public considering the games the EU seem to be playing.
I don't know what the EU think they're playing at. They really are in a negotiation where AZ hold all the cards. After all, if the EU get too bolshie AZ have the option to simply walk away from the contract, close their European factory and concentrate on other markets.
And there is exactly feck all the EU can do about it.
So the 'win' here for the EU is they accept a lower delivery than they want, and the lose is that they get none at all.
Wrong. The EU is one of the largest markets for pharmaceuticals in the world. That gives them a lot of muscle. AZ will not want to antagonise them more than necessary, so no, AZ do not hold all the cards, far from it.
So - just to be clear - the EU might ban AZ from operating in the EU altogether if they decide to abrogate a contract?
Which would cause no medicine shortages of any kind, I trust?
The EU are behaving like complete fools. It's like watching the DUP over Theresa May's deal - only worse, because you expect the DUP to behave like idiots.
The EU feels that AZ have legged them over. So they are making a fuss. A resolution will be found that puts the EU in a better position than if they had not made a fuss. This is what I predict. Bet I'm right.
At the detriment to who?
I fear it might be you, Rob. But let's hope not.
It was a legitimate question. The EU are seeking to divert supplies rightfully destined for the UK.
Not really. That's a simplistic and jaundiced view. They are "rightfully" seeking to reduce their shortfall. In general, with fixed vaccine supply, every shot someone has means somebody else did not have it. Why are we diverting jabs from Italy? Why is Israel diverting jabs from us? Etc. It all depends on the contracts, the money, the moral view, the WHO, the balance of power, the politics etc etc. Bottom line is as I summarized and people should stop sanctimoniously moaning unless and until something that warrants it occurs. Which it hasn't yet. All that's happening is a frenzy of europhobes mutually wanking each other off and wallowing in europhobia. I'm finding it infantile and tedious.
The EU are trying to bully their way into more vaccines because they've completely buggered vaccine procurement and roll-out. They might have a point if they weren't three months behind the UK, and invested more than 1/7th of the UK and US totals.
Best performing countries for Covid vaccine doses given out:
Israel (9.05 million) 47.90 per 100 population UAE (9.77 million) 27.107 per 100 population United Kingdom (67 million) 10.79 per 100 population
...
European Union (446 million) 2.11 per 100 population
Still @Nigel_Foremain reckons "big" "muscle" works when it comes to pharmaceuticals. "Big" doesn't work. "Muscle" doesn't work.
Small countries nimbly looking after themselves works.
Bear in mind, that % covers the entire population. But 21% of the UK population is under 18. So, as we have no plans to vaccinate Da Yoof yet, we have actually jabbed 10.79m of the total 53m pool - we have done over 20% of the adult population of the UK.
And we have probably jabbed a million more by now - so we are at 22.5% as of this moment.
Half-jabbed...
Which we are repeatedly told confer the majority of the protection.
Yes, we are repeatedly told that in the UK. A wing and a prayer springs to mind.
It’s almost as though the E.U., aggravated that Britain has found one benefit from Brexit so soon after leaving, are trying to act as dog in the manger to show that actually, even benefits are not benefits.
I’m sure that’s not what they’re really doing - they’re more likely just in a complete panic at having cocked up - but they could hardly be doing a better job if it was.
Hang on. The MRHA said that Brexit was not the reason for Britain being ahead on vaccines, either approval or procurement.
Well, it shouldn’t have been. But if we had waited for the EU scheme, the fact is we would not have started vaccination on this scale yet.
And whatever the facts of development etc, it does sort of look bad when an organisation that has spent all its time warning of fire, theft and Viking raids to any Leavers suddenly finds on a fairly important policy point the Leavers are ahead of them.
Even if it’s the only one there ever is, the timing is to say the least unfortunate.
Edit - and the delay very definitely is the EU’s fault. Setting up a common system took time they didn’t have, and I can’t see any financial advantage they have gained thereby.
Best performing countries for Covid vaccine doses given out:
Israel (9.05 million) 47.90 per 100 population UAE (9.77 million) 27.107 per 100 population United Kingdom (67 million) 10.79 per 100 population
...
European Union (446 million) 2.11 per 100 population
Still @Nigel_Foremain reckons "big" "muscle" works when it comes to pharmaceuticals. "Big" doesn't work. "Muscle" doesn't work.
Small countries nimbly looking after themselves works.
Bear in mind, that % covers the entire population. But 21% of the UK population is under 18. So, as we have no plans to vaccinate Da Yoof yet, we have actually jabbed 10.79m of the total 53m pool - we have done over 20% of the adult population of the UK.
And we have probably jabbed a million more by now - so we are at 22.5% as of this moment.
Half-jabbed...
Which we are repeatedly told confer the majority of the protection.
Yes, we are repeatedly told that in the UK. A wing and a prayer springs to mind.
C'mon, you're not subscribing to that BMA nonsense are you? There's MASSIVE evidence around the world that the first jab, certainly of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine, provides a very high degree of protection, both in the published clinical trial data and in the real-world experience coming out of Israel. For the AZ vaccine, the boss himself confirmed the same yesterday.
I have to say, as someone who was very strong Remain supporter who hopes we can strengthen our ties with the EU in the future from the current status, the EU couldn't have thought of a better way to solidify UK support for leaving the EU:
1) Their vaccination programme was far worse than ours. I know in theory we could gone our separate way from within the EU, but that will be lost on the average person given we have a "the UK vs. the EU" within a month of us leaving.
2) They are being protectionist to try and cover up for our mistakes. The general sense is of them trying to get vaccines back off us, which won't go down well here.
3) While not the EU, German politicians and media have spread false information about "the Oxford vaccine", which also be taken well.
The whole saga hasn't painted the EU in a good light at all.
Best performing countries for Covid vaccine doses given out:
Israel (9.05 million) 47.90 per 100 population UAE (9.77 million) 27.107 per 100 population United Kingdom (67 million) 10.79 per 100 population
...
European Union (446 million) 2.11 per 100 population
Still @Nigel_Foremain reckons "big" "muscle" works when it comes to pharmaceuticals. "Big" doesn't work. "Muscle" doesn't work.
Small countries nimbly looking after themselves works.
Bear in mind, that % covers the entire population. But 21% of the UK population is under 18. So, as we have no plans to vaccinate Da Yoof yet, we have actually jabbed 10.79m of the total 53m pool - we have done over 20% of the adult population of the UK.
And we have probably jabbed a million more by now - so we are at 22.5% as of this moment.
Half-jabbed...
Which we are repeatedly told confer the majority of the protection.
typical Tory , best you ever get is a half truth and not often you even get that. Get a grip and think outside the cult.
It’s almost as though the E.U., aggravated that Britain has found one benefit from Brexit so soon after leaving, are trying to act as dog in the manger to show that actually, even benefits are not benefits.
I’m sure that’s not what they’re really doing - they’re more likely just in a complete panic at having cocked up - but they could hardly be doing a better job if it was.
Hang on. The MRHA said that Brexit was not the reason for Britain being ahead on vaccines, either approval or procurement.
Is it not a proven fact that the insistence by the EU in signing off the contracts led to a several month delay?
It would only be interesting, indeed astonishing, if such caveats weren't in the contract.
It is completely inconceivable that the contract wouldn't include lots of such caveats. There is absolutely no way AZ would have given a firm commitment on delivery dates for a brand-new vaccine, involving new production facilities and dependent on other suppliers who themselves were also doing things for the first time, all in a super-fast timescale.
As AZ CEO has continually stated the contract is based on best endeavors.
I'm actually surprised how polite he is being in public considering the games the EU seem to be playing.
I don't know what the EU think they're playing at. They really are in a negotiation where AZ hold all the cards. After all, if the EU get too bolshie AZ have the option to simply walk away from the contract, close their European factory and concentrate on other markets.
And there is exactly feck all the EU can do about it.
So the 'win' here for the EU is they accept a lower delivery than they want, and the lose is that they get none at all.
Wrong. The EU is one of the largest markets for pharmaceuticals in the world. That gives them a lot of muscle. AZ will not want to antagonise them more than necessary, so no, AZ do not hold all the cards, far from it.
So - just to be clear - the EU might ban AZ from operating in the EU altogether if they decide to abrogate a contract?
Which would cause no medicine shortages of any kind, I trust?
The EU are behaving like complete fools. It's like watching the DUP over Theresa May's deal - only worse, because you expect the DUP to behave like idiots.
The EU feels that AZ have legged them over. So they are making a fuss. A resolution will be found that puts the EU in a better position than if they had not made a fuss. This is what I predict. Bet I'm right.
At the detriment to who?
I fear it might be you, Rob. But let's hope not.
It was a legitimate question. The EU are seeking to divert supplies rightfully destined for the UK.
Not really. That's a simplistic and jaundiced view. They are "rightfully" seeking to reduce their shortfall. In general, with fixed vaccine supply, every shot someone has means somebody else did not have it. Why are we diverting jabs from Italy? Why is Israel diverting jabs from us? Etc. It all depends on the contracts, the money, the moral view, the WHO, the balance of power, the politics etc etc. Bottom line is as I summarized and people should stop sanctimoniously moaning unless and until something that warrants it occurs. Which it hasn't yet. All that's happening is a frenzy of europhobes mutually wanking each other off and wallowing in europhobia. I'm finding it infantile and tedious.
"Rightfully"?
The EU signed their contracts three months late. It isn't europhobia to point this out.
Had Johnson's Government signed contracts three months after the EU and the UK was struggling as a result then would it be Anglophobia to point that out?
Best performing countries for Covid vaccine doses given out:
Israel (9.05 million) 47.90 per 100 population UAE (9.77 million) 27.107 per 100 population United Kingdom (67 million) 10.79 per 100 population
...
European Union (446 million) 2.11 per 100 population
Still @Nigel_Foremain reckons "big" "muscle" works when it comes to pharmaceuticals. "Big" doesn't work. "Muscle" doesn't work.
Small countries nimbly looking after themselves works.
Bear in mind, that % covers the entire population. But 21% of the UK population is under 18. So, as we have no plans to vaccinate Da Yoof yet, we have actually jabbed 10.79m of the total 53m pool - we have done over 20% of the adult population of the UK.
And we have probably jabbed a million more by now - so we are at 22.5% as of this moment.
Half-jabbed...
Which we are repeatedly told confer the majority of the protection.
Yes, we are repeatedly told that in the UK. A wing and a prayer springs to mind.
So now we shouldn't listen to the scientists?
The ones at Pfizer, the ones at WHO, the ones at the FDA, or our own? Neither virus nor vaccine changes at the border.
It all depends how much you want to follow the science, or to anticipate it. It is a gamble that may come off, but we should recognise that it is a gamble.
According to the interview with the head of AZ it offers complete protection against severe disease.
"First of all, we believe that the efficacy of one dose is sufficient: 100 percent protection against severe disease and hospitalisation"
That is the key number people should be hearing, whether its 60%, 70% or 90% efficient at preventing mild illness or even asymptomatic illness is not the same level of importance.
Yes, right now nobody should give a stuff what vaccine or number of doses they get if it keeps them out of hospital. Stopping severe disease is by far the most important effect that the vaccine has.
Best performing countries for Covid vaccine doses given out:
Israel (9.05 million) 47.90 per 100 population UAE (9.77 million) 27.107 per 100 population United Kingdom (67 million) 10.79 per 100 population
...
European Union (446 million) 2.11 per 100 population
Still @Nigel_Foremain reckons "big" "muscle" works when it comes to pharmaceuticals. "Big" doesn't work. "Muscle" doesn't work.
Small countries nimbly looking after themselves works.
Bear in mind, that % covers the entire population. But 21% of the UK population is under 18. So, as we have no plans to vaccinate Da Yoof yet, we have actually jabbed 10.79m of the total 53m pool - we have done over 20% of the adult population of the UK.
And we have probably jabbed a million more by now - so we are at 22.5% as of this moment.
Half-jabbed...
Which we are repeatedly told confer the majority of the protection.
typical Tory , best you ever get is a half truth and not often you even get that. Get a grip and think outside the cult.
Criticised for ignoring the experts, now criticised for listening to them. I can't win.
Psizer: first jab gives 90% protection, second gives 94% protection. You can see why they're delaying the second one.
The difference in antibodies a week after the second injection is 10 fold.
Foxy , you should know better than try to educate pb house experts, they know better than any Doctor. What an absolute bellend trying to teach you about the vaccine.
It’s almost as though the E.U., aggravated that Britain has found one benefit from Brexit so soon after leaving, are trying to act as dog in the manger to show that actually, even benefits are not benefits.
I’m sure that’s not what they’re really doing - they’re more likely just in a complete panic at having cocked up - but they could hardly be doing a better job if it was.
Hang on. The MRHA said that Brexit was not the reason for Britain being ahead on vaccines, either approval or procurement.
Is it not a proven fact that the insistence by the EU in signing off the contracts led to a several month delay?
Isn't that the issue that the EU has with AZN, that its promised deliveries have not been delivered?
Best performing countries for Covid vaccine doses given out:
Israel (9.05 million) 47.90 per 100 population UAE (9.77 million) 27.107 per 100 population United Kingdom (67 million) 10.79 per 100 population
...
European Union (446 million) 2.11 per 100 population
Still @Nigel_Foremain reckons "big" "muscle" works when it comes to pharmaceuticals. "Big" doesn't work. "Muscle" doesn't work.
Small countries nimbly looking after themselves works.
Bear in mind, that % covers the entire population. But 21% of the UK population is under 18. So, as we have no plans to vaccinate Da Yoof yet, we have actually jabbed 10.79m of the total 53m pool - we have done over 20% of the adult population of the UK.
And we have probably jabbed a million more by now - so we are at 22.5% as of this moment.
Half-jabbed...
Which we are repeatedly told confer the majority of the protection.
typical Tory , best you ever get is a half truth and not often you even get that. Get a grip and think outside the cult.
Considering Sturgeon and her CMO agree with him, plus the CEO of Astrazeneca, I'm curious what point you're trying to make?
It’s almost as though the E.U., aggravated that Britain has found one benefit from Brexit so soon after leaving, are trying to act as dog in the manger to show that actually, even benefits are not benefits.
I’m sure that’s not what they’re really doing - they’re more likely just in a complete panic at having cocked up - but they could hardly be doing a better job if it was.
Hang on. The MRHA said that Brexit was not the reason for Britain being ahead on vaccines, either approval or procurement.
Well, it shouldn’t have been. But if we had waited for the EU scheme, the fact is we would not have started vaccination on this scale yet.
And whatever the facts of development etc, it does sort of look bad when an organisation that has spent all its time warning of fire, theft and Viking raids to any Leavers suddenly finds on a fairly important policy point the Leavers are ahead of them.
Even if it’s the only one there ever is, the timing is to say the least unfortunate.
Edit - and the delay very definitely is the EU’s fault. Setting up a common system took time they didn’t have, and I can’t see any financial advantage they have gained thereby.
As I understand it EU involvement changed nothing of any substance but added a big, big delay.
Given we're assessing what the EU has screwed up, it's just a plain judgement. One that everybody, including people living in the EU, except EU bureaucrats seem to share.
The word was carefully selected and properly used. That something comes along to support a prejudice does not in and of itself turn the prejudice into not a prejudice.
For example, some women really do struggle to understand complex financial matters.
Best performing countries for Covid vaccine doses given out:
Israel (9.05 million) 47.90 per 100 population UAE (9.77 million) 27.107 per 100 population United Kingdom (67 million) 10.79 per 100 population
...
European Union (446 million) 2.11 per 100 population
Still @Nigel_Foremain reckons "big" "muscle" works when it comes to pharmaceuticals. "Big" doesn't work. "Muscle" doesn't work.
Small countries nimbly looking after themselves works.
Bear in mind, that % covers the entire population. But 21% of the UK population is under 18. So, as we have no plans to vaccinate Da Yoof yet, we have actually jabbed 10.79m of the total 53m pool - we have done over 20% of the adult population of the UK.
And we have probably jabbed a million more by now - so we are at 22.5% as of this moment.
Half-jabbed...
Which we are repeatedly told confer the majority of the protection.
typical Tory , best you ever get is a half truth and not often you even get that. Get a grip and think outside the cult.
Criticised for ignoring the experts, now criticised for listening to them. I can't win.
It’s almost as though the E.U., aggravated that Britain has found one benefit from Brexit so soon after leaving, are trying to act as dog in the manger to show that actually, even benefits are not benefits.
I’m sure that’s not what they’re really doing - they’re more likely just in a complete panic at having cocked up - but they could hardly be doing a better job if it was.
Hang on. The MRHA said that Brexit was not the reason for Britain being ahead on vaccines, either approval or procurement.
Is it not a proven fact that the insistence by the EU in signing off the contracts led to a several month delay?
Isn't that the issue that the EU has with AZN, that its promised deliveries have not been delivered?
The UK had the exact same issue. The UK's toys are firmly within the pram.
It’s almost as though the E.U., aggravated that Britain has found one benefit from Brexit so soon after leaving, are trying to act as dog in the manger to show that actually, even benefits are not benefits.
I’m sure that’s not what they’re really doing - they’re more likely just in a complete panic at having cocked up - but they could hardly be doing a better job if it was.
Hang on. The MRHA said that Brexit was not the reason for Britain being ahead on vaccines, either approval or procurement.
Well, it shouldn’t have been. But if we had waited for the EU scheme, the fact is we would not have started vaccination on this scale yet.
And whatever the facts of development etc, it does sort of look bad when an organisation that has spent all its time warning of fire, theft and Viking raids to any Leavers suddenly finds on a fairly important policy point the Leavers are ahead of them.
Even if it’s the only one there ever is, the timing is to say the least unfortunate.
Edit - and the delay very definitely is the EU’s fault. Setting up a common system took time they didn’t have, and I can’t see any financial advantage they have gained thereby.
Given that AZ have said they won't take profits from the scheme how could the EU gain financially from it.
Clever from SKS asking for early vaccination of teachers.
Boris may well have planned that anyway but now will find it challenging to do so.
It's a good idea - if he wasn't, he should do so and thank Keir (and me of course, last week) for the idea. It can't harm Boris to be seen to be listening.
Boris just took it apart by saying labour are now acting as experts and against JCVI who are the experts advisors and Labour need to say which vulnerable groups identified by the JCVI will have their vaccines withdrawn to favour his recommendation
Pfizer: first jab gives 90% protection, second gives 94% protection. You can see why they're delaying the second one.
That's great news if true. Given Astra has said it's also fine to delay their second dose, our strategy - though I was initially sceptical may well be correct.
It’s almost as though the E.U., aggravated that Britain has found one benefit from Brexit so soon after leaving, are trying to act as dog in the manger to show that actually, even benefits are not benefits.
I’m sure that’s not what they’re really doing - they’re more likely just in a complete panic at having cocked up - but they could hardly be doing a better job if it was.
Hang on. The MRHA said that Brexit was not the reason for Britain being ahead on vaccines, either approval or procurement.
Well, it shouldn’t have been. But if we had waited for the EU scheme, the fact is we would not have started vaccination on this scale yet.
And whatever the facts of development etc, it does sort of look bad when an organisation that has spent all its time warning of fire, theft and Viking raids to any Leavers suddenly finds on a fairly important policy point the Leavers are ahead of them.
Even if it’s the only one there ever is, the timing is to say the least unfortunate.
And the MHRA made no such statement on procurement, they said that the approval was done within existing EU rules.
If we were in the EU there would have been no way to resist the EU purchase agreement for vaccines or ventilators. Happily the latter turned out to be a lesser issue but the former would have seen is stuck with not enough doses and too many people and being reliant on companies doing enough to manufacture doses rather than directly subsidising production as we have done for AZ and Novovax.
Kate Bingham said that our deal with Oxford and AZ would not have been possible under the terms of the EU deal which is why we didn't go for it.
Some EU defenders refuse to see what it really is, thankfully it's becoming rarer and rarer. This whole vaccines issue is blowing up their reputation, even among remainers.
It’s almost as though the E.U., aggravated that Britain has found one benefit from Brexit so soon after leaving, are trying to act as dog in the manger to show that actually, even benefits are not benefits.
I’m sure that’s not what they’re really doing - they’re more likely just in a complete panic at having cocked up - but they could hardly be doing a better job if it was.
Hang on. The MRHA said that Brexit was not the reason for Britain being ahead on vaccines, either approval or procurement.
Well, it shouldn’t have been. But if we had waited for the EU scheme, the fact is we would not have started vaccination on this scale yet.
And whatever the facts of development etc, it does sort of look bad when an organisation that has spent all its time warning of fire, theft and Viking raids to any Leavers suddenly finds on a fairly important policy point the Leavers are ahead of them.
Even if it’s the only one there ever is, the timing is to say the least unfortunate.
Edit - and the delay very definitely is the EU’s fault. Setting up a common system took time they didn’t have, and I can’t see any financial advantage they have gained thereby.
Given that AZ have said they won't take profits from the scheme how could the EU gain financially from it.
I think the idea was they would get bulk discount from Pfizer, which is quite expensive. But unfortunately Pfizer May have been the first and most expensive, and most effectual, but also the least useful. AstraZeneca and Oxford going for the non-profit model on a vaccine you can store and transport easily means Pfizer is unlikely to be the vaccine of choice for most places.
And what a performance by the City of Cambridge ... the smallest excess in E,W & S.
No statistically significant excess deaths from COVID. In a City of 123k. Top of the Class.
Doesn't that just point out the limitation of the tool at this granular level?
If you look at the figures, 71 people in Cambridge died with COVID. The figure in similarly sized Norwich is 49. Yet Norwich is shown with a reasonably substantial 19% excess death rate whereas Cambridge, where to reiterate MORE people have died with COVID, is shown as having no excess deaths.
So what's happening here? Are Cambridge recording deaths in a very different way? Is Norwich having a whole load of people dying of COVID without any diagnosis? It seems more likely that Norwich has had a fairly low death rate in the period before COVID for whatever reason, and Cambridge a fairly high one. It also seems as if it probably isn't sensible to do this on a local authority level as it reflects more random variance in the numbers when looking at quite small samples, rather than some kind of story of success in Cambridge and failure in Norwich.
I asked this before - who benefited from such a prosecution? Was it because the "wrong people" bought Rangers?
Hard to know but they are really poor at it for sure. The Lord Advocate being in the Cabinet and in charge of Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service is an absolute scandal.
Best performing countries for Covid vaccine doses given out:
Israel (9.05 million) 47.90 per 100 population UAE (9.77 million) 27.107 per 100 population United Kingdom (67 million) 10.79 per 100 population
...
European Union (446 million) 2.11 per 100 population
Still @Nigel_Foremain reckons "big" "muscle" works when it comes to pharmaceuticals. "Big" doesn't work. "Muscle" doesn't work.
Small countries nimbly looking after themselves works.
Bear in mind, that % covers the entire population. But 21% of the UK population is under 18. So, as we have no plans to vaccinate Da Yoof yet, we have actually jabbed 10.79m of the total 53m pool - we have done over 20% of the adult population of the UK.
And we have probably jabbed a million more by now - so we are at 22.5% as of this moment.
Half-jabbed...
Which we are repeatedly told confer the majority of the protection.
Yes, we are repeatedly told that in the UK. A wing and a prayer springs to mind.
C'mon, you're not subscribing to that BMA nonsense are you? There's MASSIVE evidence around the world that the first jab, certainly of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine, provides a very high degree of protection, both in the published clinical trial data and in the real-world experience coming out of Israel. For the AZ vaccine, the boss himself confirmed the same yesterday.
As I said, it may be a gamble that comes off, but it is a gamble.
Israel is sticking to the protocol, so we have to wait until March to see if our different protocol works.
There is far, far too little made of the hard data coming out of Israel IMO. I mean, has anyone even seen this featured on TV news anywhere? I might have missed it. But it seems to me to be the key story.
It's one reason why I have effectively binned the main TV news programmes – an arbitrary death milestone that we have known for weeks was coming up is considered bigger news than the actual evidence that we have a way out of this.
1st dose 2nd dose Total 259306 1001 East Of England 29244 47 London 43555 445 Midlands 41813 131 North East And Yorkshire 38513 56 North West 35271 95 South East 39181 177 South West 29908 47
Best performing countries for Covid vaccine doses given out:
Israel (9.05 million) 47.90 per 100 population UAE (9.77 million) 27.107 per 100 population United Kingdom (67 million) 10.79 per 100 population
...
European Union (446 million) 2.11 per 100 population
Still @Nigel_Foremain reckons "big" "muscle" works when it comes to pharmaceuticals. "Big" doesn't work. "Muscle" doesn't work.
Small countries nimbly looking after themselves works.
Bear in mind, that % covers the entire population. But 21% of the UK population is under 18. So, as we have no plans to vaccinate Da Yoof yet, we have actually jabbed 10.79m of the total 53m pool - we have done over 20% of the adult population of the UK.
And we have probably jabbed a million more by now - so we are at 22.5% as of this moment.
Half-jabbed...
Which we are repeatedly told confer the majority of the protection.
Yes, we are repeatedly told that in the UK. A wing and a prayer springs to mind.
So now we shouldn't listen to the scientists?
The ones at Pfizer, the ones at WHO, the ones at the FDA, or our own? Neither virus nor vaccine changes at the border.
It all depends how much you want to follow the science, or to anticipate it. It is a gamble that may come off, but we should recognise that it is a gamble.
What choice wouldn't be a gamble?
If you're preferring vaccinating half as many people twice you are gambling the lives of all of those you leave unvaccinated.
Are you prepared to do that? Are you prepared to accept that is a gamble too?
Which seven million people of the 14 million top 4 vulnerable groups would you personally choose to deny an early vaccine to as part of that gamble that leaving half the people unvaccinated is better than vaccinating everyone once?
According to the interview with the head of AZ it offers complete protection against severe disease.
"First of all, we believe that the efficacy of one dose is sufficient: 100 percent protection against severe disease and hospitalisation"
That is the key number people should be hearing, whether its 60%, 70% or 90% efficient at preventing mild illness or even asymptomatic illness is not the same level of importance.
Yes, right now nobody should give a stuff what vaccine or number of doses they get if it keeps them out of hospital. Stopping severe disease is by far the most important effect that the vaccine has.
There is huge focus on deviating from the Pfizer protocol, but aren't the majority of people getting the AZN vaccine? The talk was of 5m doses of Pfizer, 20m of AZN being in the current pipeline.
Any direct comparison to Israel is a bit flawed because they are only using Pfizer, which appear in PIII trials to give a higher level of protection after one or two doses.
The ones at Pfizer, the ones at WHO, the ones at the FDA, or our own? Neither virus nor vaccine changes at the border.
It all depends how much you want to follow the science, or to anticipate it. It is a gamble that may come off, but we should recognise that it is a gamble.
A gamble? So (to borrow Sir John Stevens' point of yesterday), vaccinating one of your elderly parents with two doses and leaving the other totally unprotected, rather than both with one dose each with possibly slightly lower protection, isn't a gamble? Sounds like a hell of a gamble to me, much, much bigger than extrapolating from the already quite good data we have on the effectiveness of one dose over the period we're talking about.
It would only be interesting, indeed astonishing, if such caveats weren't in the contract.
It is completely inconceivable that the contract wouldn't include lots of such caveats. There is absolutely no way AZ would have given a firm commitment on delivery dates for a brand-new vaccine, involving new production facilities and dependent on other suppliers who themselves were also doing things for the first time, all in a super-fast timescale.
As AZ CEO has continually stated the contract is based on best endeavors.
I'm actually surprised how polite he is being in public considering the games the EU seem to be playing.
I don't know what the EU think they're playing at. They really are in a negotiation where AZ hold all the cards. After all, if the EU get too bolshie AZ have the option to simply walk away from the contract, close their European factory and concentrate on other markets.
And there is exactly feck all the EU can do about it.
So the 'win' here for the EU is they accept a lower delivery than they want, and the lose is that they get none at all.
Wrong. The EU is one of the largest markets for pharmaceuticals in the world. That gives them a lot of muscle. AZ will not want to antagonise them more than necessary, so no, AZ do not hold all the cards, far from it.
So - just to be clear - the EU might ban AZ from operating in the EU altogether if they decide to abrogate a contract?
Which would cause no medicine shortages of any kind, I trust?
The EU are behaving like complete fools. It's like watching the DUP over Theresa May's deal - only worse, because you expect the DUP to behave like idiots.
The EU feels that AZ have legged them over. So they are making a fuss. A resolution will be found that puts the EU in a better position than if they had not made a fuss. This is what I predict. Bet I'm right.
At the detriment to who?
I fear it might be you, Rob. But let's hope not.
It was a legitimate question. The EU are seeking to divert supplies rightfully destined for the UK.
Not really. That's a simplistic and jaundiced view. They are "rightfully" seeking to reduce their shortfall. In general, with fixed vaccine supply, every shot someone has means somebody else did not have it. Why are we diverting jabs from Italy? Why is Israel diverting jabs from us? Etc. It all depends on the contracts, the money, the moral view, the WHO, the balance of power, the politics etc etc. Bottom line is as I summarized and people should stop sanctimoniously moaning unless and until something that warrants it occurs. Which it hasn't yet. All that's happening is a frenzy of europhobes mutually wanking each other off and wallowing in europhobia. I'm finding it infantile and tedious.
"Rightfully"?
The EU signed their contracts three months late. It isn't europhobia to point this out.
Had Johnson's Government signed contracts three months after the EU and the UK was struggling as a result then would it be Anglophobia to point that out?
Good point. Can you please share that link again to the contract (did someone quote an extract upthread?).
It’s almost as though the E.U., aggravated that Britain has found one benefit from Brexit so soon after leaving, are trying to act as dog in the manger to show that actually, even benefits are not benefits.
I’m sure that’s not what they’re really doing - they’re more likely just in a complete panic at having cocked up - but they could hardly be doing a better job if it was.
Hang on. The MRHA said that Brexit was not the reason for Britain being ahead on vaccines, either approval or procurement.
Is it not a proven fact that the insistence by the EU in signing off the contracts led to a several month delay?
Isn't that the issue that the EU has with AZN, that its promised deliveries have not been delivered?
You seem to be changing the point - the point was that we were able to get our contract agreed earlier - Several EU nations were ready to agree their contracts earlier but the EU would not allow them to do so as they insisted on then signing off - which took them months for no real change.
As to your latest point - they were not promised amounts - the contract appears to state that there can be no guarantees but best endeavours will be used to deliver the agreed upon amounts.
Try and spin it how you want but the EU are acting like dicks
1st dose 2nd dose Total 259306 1001 East Of England 29244 47 London 43555 445 Midlands 41813 131 North East And Yorkshire 38513 56 North West 35271 95 South East 39181 177 South West 29908 47
Clearly vaccine supply shortage hitting home. Time to go full Cartman on Pfizer and AZN.
It is quite possible -- if the EU continue to behave like this -- that it magnifies Boris' "success".
Is CCHQ advIsing the EU ?
Because i really cannot think of much that could help Boris more than the EU over-reacting and blocking vaccine exports.
It simultaneously focuses voters' attention on Boris' one big success in the COVID pandemic, as well as one big advantage of Brexit.
And by over-reacting, the EU look like a mobster state.
Why does the EU give a damn how this makes Boris Johnson look? It's a very Anglocentric view of things.
The EU presumably see it as key to look to people in the EU as if they are playing hardball with a pharma company who have fallen short of their contractual obligations, and in fact to squeeze as much vaccine out of AZ as possible. If that also distracts British citizens from the massive death rate in the UK, and benefits Johnson, so what from their perspective?
It is quite possible -- if the EU continue to behave like this -- that it magnifies Boris' "success".
Is CCHQ advIsing the EU ?
Because i really cannot think of much that could help Boris more than the EU over-reacting and blocking vaccine exports.
It simultaneously focuses voters' attention on Boris' one big success in the COVID pandemic, as well as one big advantage of Brexit.
And by over-reacting, the EU look like a mobster state.
It's really amazing - the EU couldn't be doing a better job for Boris and the Government if they'd been hired to do PR at a million pounds a day. You can't buy this kind of coverage.
A very generous gesture from our continental cousins
Comments
European sclerosis has been a critical failing for decades but many have denied that it is a problem ... only to be seeing what it means in real time now.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FcArnepkhv0
Given we're assessing what the EU has screwed up, it's just a plain judgement. One that everybody, including people living in the EU, except EU bureaucrats seem to share.
Not double jabbed. Unless the needle only went in halfway?
And what a performance by the City of Cambridge ... the smallest excess in E,W & S.
No statistically significant excess deaths from COVID. In a City of 123k. Top of the Class.
When people stand up to a bully very often it reveals the attempted bully is actually weak and powerless.
Exchange odds will tend to reflect buzz being generated but, for a really ambitious Republican, the best thing to do is to keep a reasonably low media profile while the internal war rages before emerging as a fresh "new" Republican (whatever the definition of that eventually becomes) in 2022.
That's not to say there's zero chance of Hawley, or Carlson or whoever emerging. They are ambitious and loud, and may come through. But I think they'll be unrealistically short in the betting due to buzz, then drift later as the quieter ones come in, before perhaps coming back in if they survive - so a trading lay early on.
https://twitter.com/nicktolhurst/status/1354418652154634247
1. 'Subject to approval by the EMA', which would be an interesting one to bring into the mix.
2. A clause stipulating that AZ won't favour other clients over the EU. The EU might think this gives them the right to dip into our supplies, but I doubt whether a proper reading of the various contracts would support that, assuming the AZ lawyers know what they are doing (which is a very, very good assumption).
I’m sure that’s not what they’re really doing - they’re more likely just in a complete panic at having cocked up - but they could hardly be doing a better job if it was.
https://twitter.com/Reuters/status/1354423961099112456?s=20
"First of all, we believe that the efficacy of one dose is sufficient: 100 percent protection against severe disease and hospitalisation"
That is the key number people should be hearing, whether its 60%, 70% or 90% efficient at preventing mild illness or even asymptomatic illness is not the same level of importance.
Edit - answered below.
This of course makes good sense. The threat to children from Covid-19 is vanishingly small, so it makes sense to exclude them.
But all figures from all nations should therefore be expressed as a percentage of the eligible population, not the total population.
If the government agrees to one claim, then suddenly there will be thousands if not millions of others...
https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1354426399751348224?s=20
And whatever the facts of development etc, it does sort of look bad when an organisation that has spent all its time warning of fire, theft and Viking raids to any Leavers suddenly finds on a fairly important policy point the Leavers are ahead of them.
Even if it’s the only one there ever is, the timing is to say the least unfortunate.
Edit - and the delay very definitely is the EU’s fault. Setting up a common system took time they didn’t have, and I can’t see any financial advantage they have gained thereby.
https://www.ft.com/content/4d9fe80d-e604-4bbe-b0f8-fd4b8df9b7f1
1) Their vaccination programme was far worse than ours. I know in theory we could gone our separate way from within the EU, but that will be lost on the average person given we have a "the UK vs. the EU" within a month of us leaving.
2) They are being protectionist to try and cover up for our mistakes. The general sense is of them trying to get vaccines back off us, which won't go down well here.
3) While not the EU, German politicians and media have spread false information about "the Oxford vaccine", which also be taken well.
The whole saga hasn't painted the EU in a good light at all.
The EU signed their contracts three months late. It isn't europhobia to point this out.
Had Johnson's Government signed contracts three months after the EU and the UK was struggling as a result then would it be Anglophobia to point that out?
It all depends how much you want to follow the science, or to anticipate it. It is a gamble that may come off, but we should recognise that it is a gamble.
What an absolute bellend trying to teach you about the vaccine.
Is the SNP government part of the Tory cult now?
For example, some women really do struggle to understand complex financial matters.
But you know all this, Morris. Grandmother, eggs.
Especially Teachers.
In other words setting labour up against the JCVI
@MarqueeMark will fill you in on the details.
Given Astra has said it's also fine to delay their second dose, our strategy - though I was initially sceptical may well be correct.
If we were in the EU there would have been no way to resist the EU purchase agreement for vaccines or ventilators. Happily the latter turned out to be a lesser issue but the former would have seen is stuck with not enough doses and too many people and being reliant on companies doing enough to manufacture doses rather than directly subsidising production as we have done for AZ and Novovax.
Kate Bingham said that our deal with Oxford and AZ would not have been possible under the terms of the EU deal which is why we didn't go for it.
Some EU defenders refuse to see what it really is, thankfully it's becoming rarer and rarer. This whole vaccines issue is blowing up their reputation, even among remainers.
It is quite possible -- if the EU continue to behave like this -- that it magnifies Boris' "success".
Is CCHQ advIsing the EU ?
Because i really cannot think of much that could help Boris more than the EU over-reacting and blocking vaccine exports.
It simultaneously focuses voters' attention on Boris' one big success in the COVID pandemic, as well as one big advantage of Brexit.
And by over-reacting, the EU look like a mobster state.
If you look at the figures, 71 people in Cambridge died with COVID. The figure in similarly sized Norwich is 49. Yet Norwich is shown with a reasonably substantial 19% excess death rate whereas Cambridge, where to reiterate MORE people have died with COVID, is shown as having no excess deaths.
So what's happening here? Are Cambridge recording deaths in a very different way? Is Norwich having a whole load of people dying of COVID without any diagnosis? It seems more likely that Norwich has had a fairly low death rate in the period before COVID for whatever reason, and Cambridge a fairly high one. It also seems as if it probably isn't sensible to do this on a local authority level as it reflects more random variance in the numbers when looking at quite small samples, rather than some kind of story of success in Cambridge and failure in Norwich.
Israel is sticking to the protocol, so we have to wait until March to see if our different protocol works.
It's one reason why I have effectively binned the main TV news programmes – an arbitrary death milestone that we have known for weeks was coming up is considered bigger news than the actual evidence that we have a way out of this.
1st dose 2nd dose
Total 259306 1001
East Of England 29244 47
London 43555 445
Midlands 41813 131
North East And Yorkshire 38513 56
North West 35271 95
South East 39181 177
South West 29908 47
We are more f*cked than a stepmom on Pornhub when our 18 month clearing exemption ends and it isn't permanently renewed.
But those of us in the financial services sector we rank lower than fish.
If you're preferring vaccinating half as many people twice you are gambling the lives of all of those you leave unvaccinated.
Are you prepared to do that? Are you prepared to accept that is a gamble too?
Which seven million people of the 14 million top 4 vulnerable groups would you personally choose to deny an early vaccine to as part of that gamble that leaving half the people unvaccinated is better than vaccinating everyone once?
Correct.
Any direct comparison to Israel is a bit flawed because they are only using Pfizer, which appear in PIII trials to give a higher level of protection after one or two doses.
Thanks.
As to your latest point - they were not promised amounts - the contract appears to state that there can be no guarantees but best endeavours will be used to deliver the agreed upon amounts.
Try and spin it how you want but the EU are acting like dicks
Leave the EU tick, end free movement tick, keep Nissan in Sunderland tick, reduce the influence of the City of London tick
The EU presumably see it as key to look to people in the EU as if they are playing hardball with a pharma company who have fallen short of their contractual obligations, and in fact to squeeze as much vaccine out of AZ as possible. If that also distracts British citizens from the massive death rate in the UK, and benefits Johnson, so what from their perspective?
A very generous gesture from our continental cousins
https://twitter.com/nicktolhurst/status/1354419288313126923