davek
Player Valuation: £150m
Two countries: one part of an international bloc; the other wanting re-entry into it.
Current Affairs Coronavirus Thread - Serious stuff !!!
- Thread starter bullybeef
- Start date
- Status
Two countries: one part of an international bloc; the other wanting re-entry into it.
Might depend which side of the border you are
Last edited:
Spadge Vernacular
Player Valuation: £70m
Imperial vaccine tech to target COVID mutations and booster doses | Imperial News | Imperial College London
Imperial is focusing its RNA vaccine technology to target SARS-CoV-2 mutations, boosters and thermostability rather than an immediate efficacy trial.
www.imperial.ac.uk
Deckard2049
Player Valuation: £15m
NilSatisOptimum
Player Valuation: £70m
A disclaimer before the angry populist mob thump their screen and keyboards, have the vaccine whatever one is offered.
In regards AZ they do have strong ties to the Wellcome Trust formerly known as British Eugenics Society... As somebody who has lots to do with disabilities for one reason or other which is neither here or there. It’s on my radar, not to say other big Pharmaceuticals have similar relationships around the world, they almost certainly do.
Just not going to be told or have it suggested these big Pharmaceuticals are all virtuous and good because of their vaccines, they have had lots of tax payer monies to do it, 100s of millions of £s, and had they not been given the money they would not be bothering, that is most certain.
It’s of note had Vince Cable while Businesses secretary had not intervened along with Labour opposition, the Coalition government lead by the Conservatives would have long allowed the sale of AZ to Pizfer some years ago...
Last edited:
Like we went over the other day, it depends what's in the contract and how it's written. AZ claim it wasn't a guarantee, EU obviously think otherwise.
But that's not actually what was being discussed. It's the assumption that AZ were using vaccine produced in the Belgian/Dutch plants to supplement the UK stocks. That has been denied, so unless it's proved, then the person being interviewed in the article is basically barking up the wrong tree?
Obviously, if they can prove that that happened, then it's a different story.
I'm not sure it was the AZ CEO who actually first brought the UK into it? @tsubaki
I thought that the EU brought the UK into it by a) demanding that stocks from the UK be delivered to the EU and b) suggesting that the EU plants had been used to bolster UK stocks (which AZ have denied).
In all honesty, I think both sides are clearly in the wrong, though.
AZ shouldn't have even made a 'best effort' guarantee of that much, but then again, the EU Commission shouldn't have delayed over renegotiations for no valid reason, and then demanded that AZ delivered at the same time as they delievered to the UK. Simultaneously, AZ shouldn't have agreed to even try that - they should have said 'this is what we can definitely do, if all goes well with the plants/yield issues'.
Again, though, have to factor in that in August, when that contract with the EU was signed, the UK plants had not fully began so yield issues that they have had in the UK will not have been present, so at the time of signing the deal, not all the info would have been known. However, given that I imagine the lawyers on both sides are the very best at what they do, you'd have thought there could have been addendums etc added in after the initial signing, based on new information coming to light.
Both in the wrong, but the EU have very little right to demand the UK plant starts to bolster EU stocks, because while there were seemingly parts of their contract with AZ that were based on semantics (which is mad!), the UK-AZ contract is reported to clearly state the UK plant has to first fulfil the 100m order to the UK. The moral side of that, well, that's up for debate. Perhaps with the J&J and Novavax vaccine hopefully coming in the next 2 months, then there'll be more leeway one way or the other.
I thought that the EU brought the UK into it by a) demanding that stocks from the UK be delivered to the EU and b) suggesting that the EU plants had been used to bolster UK stocks (which AZ have denied).
In all honesty, I think both sides are clearly in the wrong, though.
AZ shouldn't have even made a 'best effort' guarantee of that much, but then again, the EU Commission shouldn't have delayed over renegotiations for no valid reason, and then demanded that AZ delivered at the same time as they delievered to the UK. Simultaneously, AZ shouldn't have agreed to even try that - they should have said 'this is what we can definitely do, if all goes well with the plants/yield issues'.
Again, though, have to factor in that in August, when that contract with the EU was signed, the UK plants had not fully began so yield issues that they have had in the UK will not have been present, so at the time of signing the deal, not all the info would have been known. However, given that I imagine the lawyers on both sides are the very best at what they do, you'd have thought there could have been addendums etc added in after the initial signing, based on new information coming to light.
Both in the wrong, but the EU have very little right to demand the UK plant starts to bolster EU stocks, because while there were seemingly parts of their contract with AZ that were based on semantics (which is mad!), the UK-AZ contract is reported to clearly state the UK plant has to first fulfil the 100m order to the UK. The moral side of that, well, that's up for debate. Perhaps with the J&J and Novavax vaccine hopefully coming in the next 2 months, then there'll be more leeway one way or the other.
I don't think anyone is claiming that the Big Pharma companies, much like tech companies etc, do anything out of the goodness and pureness of their hearts.
Hopefully you're in the clear mate, all the best.
Terrarian
Player Valuation: £50m
Thanks, I am more concerned for my colleague she has asthma
Probably best to just keep everyone locked up in that case
- Status