Current Affairs Coronavirus Thread - Serious stuff !!!

Status
Not open for further replies.
COYBL25 said:
AZ have said the same thing.
Click to expand...
Good stuff there on both fronts, as this post backs up what quoted on the first.

They are still saying all will be done by July. Just that they are prioritising the over 50s during the shortage next month. When they also have to do many more second jabs for the over 60s. Which they have to do first because of the 12 week time table. It is unfortunate but unless the delay lasts longer than 4 weeks should not mean the end of July schedule for all adults is lost. Just reorganised.
 
oh look...a U.K. company called Croda provides ingredients for the Pfizer vaccine...should someone mention it to VDL
From last December......

”Croda International Plc (“Croda” or “the Group”), the speciality chemical company that uses smart science to create high performance ingredients and technologies that improve lives, today announces that it has recently entered into an agreement with Pfizer Inc. to supply novel excipients used in the manufacture of a COVID-19 vaccine candidate. The contract with Pfizer runs for five years and awards Croda an initial supply contract for four component excipients used in the production of the vaccine candidate for the first three years of the contract. Demand remains subject to relevant approvals.”
 
Barnfred 55 said:
Sorry. When you made a couple of references to things being "sourced" I thought you were referring to evidence.

As regards import/export of vaccines between the UK and EU, we need to give some relevance to production figures in each area. The UK have 2 production sites for the AZ vaccine. Given that, in the UK, we may have 20m by the end of March, and some of those you say were actually coming from the EU sites. So say the UK sites provided 15m, that's 5m per month.

The EU is expecting 40m AZ vaccines by end of March. Add in the 5m it sent to the UK, then it must be producing 15m a month at it's plants in Belgium and Holland.. Then you have the Pfizer vaccine that is now producing 100m vaccines per month for the EU, plus those it is exporting to UK and US, say 110m a month. So within the EU jurisdiction, there are approximately 125m doses of vaccine per month being produced. In the UK around 5m a month. Based on those figures it doesn't seem that unreasonable that the EU have exported 10m doses to the UK and the UK zero in return.
Click to expand...

My understanding mate, is both the EU and UK signed a contract for provision of AZ orders from four factories - these are the designated European supply chain, by that I mean Europe as continent rather then EU. Two sits are in the UK, Two sites are in the EU. Belgium and Netherlands. Both the EU and UK paid for the development of all the sites.

So far, the EU supply has come from the Belgian plant, they have also exported to the UK as noted by the UK vaccine task force. The Netherlands plant isn’t operating yet. The two UK plants are producing, but no exports of AZ have left the UK for the EU. So the UK sites might be providing just south of 70% of AZ in the Europe region and has 0 exports. For the UK to do what they’ve done with the roll out they need supply and that could well explain it.

I’m not going to speculate on production figures as I don’t know them and we’d both be guessing, nor I think should we guess because it just leads to whataboutery.

I do know the difficulty and difference between the EU and UK roll out is supply, that’s just logical, AZ is making up more about 20% of EU vaccination, it’s significantly more in the UK, it’s agreed schedule delivered to the is 70% less then it’s contract obligations, while the UK is about 20% ahead in roll out, not exporting from plants the EU has contracted with. For me that’s an unfair situation on balance. Particularly with the EU exporting to the UK.

I’d wholly accept the UK have a right to import contracted vaccines from sites in the EU, no issue there at all. But if you accept that, then you have to accept the EU has a contractual right to to export imports from the UK from its contractual obligation. That hasn’t happened. So it’s logical that, that situation won’t continue, hence today. I mean no one is going to continue to export when they hold the opinion that rightful imports are being blocked. The UK, EU, AZ I’m sure all have different takes on that and their own interests. But here we are, brinkmanship and possible sanctions.

The clever play of course is to work together and balance it all out, which will probably happen in the end via a few pucks, maybe it’s happened already, given the April supply issues with AZ and hopefully things don’t escalate.
 
Last edited:
Chris O'Connor said:
I can understand the immense frustration there must be at the very top of the technocracy when a major EU wide procurement program has so completely unravelled with logistical and supply issues. You can easily read the spin in every announcement, they know it's a total mess and are looking around at how best to deflect from the real architects.

I must admit to being slightly perturbed by their far too centralised approach. Their intentions were idealistic and well meaning, it was great in theoretical terms but just hasn't worked out that way. One centralised big project breaks and everyone suffers, a broken spoke in the wheel has caused far too many difficulties across the board.

Perhaps the problem is in the management it's too unwieldy and bureaucratic filled with placemen to appease various factions, too large, perhaps unable to divide easily and make efficient and more manageable. Has similarities to when companies become so big they lose focus on why they exist, their customer base and how to answer their questions, deal with their problems and serve them better.
Click to expand...

If I was critiquing the EU mate, I would agree to an extent they were idealistic around fraternity and the principals of working together, but that’s the EU philosophy.

Personally I think they were massively naive in their dealing with big pharma and other countries/regions who are not unjustifiably looking after their own self interest.

The EU have been naieve and agreed idealistic, far to nice, but they can be menacing when they need to be and I think we will see a bit of that going on.
 
Last edited:
With these vaccine passports for travel - have they said its going to be based on having had both doses or just at least the one?

No chance I'll have had both by August.
 
ForeverBlue92 said:
With these vaccine passports for travel - have they said its going to be based on having had both doses or just at least the one?

No chance I'll have had both by August.
Click to expand...
It isn't clear yet as it is only a proposal at the moment but I'm guessing it would require full vaccination as you aren't properly vaccinated until you've had both doses (or one in the case of Johnson & Johnson). You may also be able to travel if you can prove you have had covid. This is how it works with Israel's domestic vaccine passport (green pass).

It's also not clear whether all EU countries would be required to use a vaccine passport and there are numerous other issues to be worked out. For example Hungary has been using Sputnik and Sinopharm vaccines which aren't authorised by the EMA yet so those people wouldn't be covered by the passport.

Then there is the question of whether we can come to an agreement with the EU to be covered by the passport. In theory it shouldn't be a problem as we are using the same vaccines they are but again who knows.

It will all become clearer soon enough. Just don't book a holiday unless you know you can get your money back or are willing to lose it as we don't even know if we will be able to travel at all, let alone make use of vaccine passports.
 
This article may have been posted in the past so apologies if so. But it shows that similar blood clotting issues at similarly low levels were seen in the US in early February and they have continued to vaccinate with no major problems. It is a very interesting article in general and worth reading if you can (I think New York Times might be behind a paywall but you get a few free articles a month).

This post is not meant as comment on whether one vaccine is better than any others or whether some are dealing with the potential issues better than others. I'm purely posting it to highlight that people shouldn't be worried about taking any of the vaccines available at the moment and that the risk of blood clots or other serious issues are lower than the risk of not getting the vaccine. Especially if you are older or in the vulnerable groups.

www.nytimes.com

A Few Covid Vaccine Recipients Developed a Rare Blood Disorder

A link to the vaccines is not certain, and investigations are underway in some reported cases.
www.nytimes.com www.nytimes.com
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

→ Log in 🔑 Register
🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top