Vorpal wrote:We've had a letter home that the British (aka Kent) variant is in community transmission in our area, and that it not only is more transmissible, but it is more likely to infect younger people, and transmits much more easily among children than the previous variants
It's one of our best exports! (Some would say our only export).
I've always suspected our government have used the Kent variant being more transmissible as an excuse for the mistake of putting kids back in school last September the result being many thousands more dead, a further traumatized nhs and doing a u turn on that policy in Jan.
merseymouth wrote:Hi, Why don't the E.U. block that like everything else they've put the mockers on? MM
Because AZ won't ship them their full order?
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
merseymouth wrote:Hi, Why don't the E.U. block that like everything else they've put the mockers on? MM
Because AZ won't ship them their full order?
But we've imported 9 million doses of vaccine from the EU. Their order can't be that big otherwise we could have kept it and not imported all those...
TBH I'm not sure I understand what's going on here at all...
Perhaps they've got the vaccines but haven't got the chips to put in them. Probably made in blighty by Arm Ltd, which would explain their choice of name..
kwackers wrote:But we've imported 9 million doses of vaccine from the EU. Their order can't be that big otherwise we could have kept it and not imported all those...
TBH I'm not sure I understand what's going on here at all...
Perhaps they've got the vaccines but haven't got the chips to put in them. Probably made in blighty by Arm Ltd, which would explain their choice of name..
What's even weirder is that when von der Leyen said this a few days ago a significant number of EU countries had suspended use of the AZ vaccine. Why threaten to stop exporting them when you're not using them?
Ben@Forest wrote:What's even weirder is that when von der Leyen said this a few days ago a significant number of EU countries had suspended use of the AZ vaccine. Why threaten to stop exporting them when you're not using them?
Because the suspension was temporary and only in a bit over half the countries, while the underdelivery covers at least 6 months.
KTHSullivan wrote:I was watching Ursula Gertrud von der Leyen on the box the other evening, she was stood on the dais at the European parliament. I felt that there was something missing in her presentation
Is that just what you think of all Germans? Or vdL is reportedly a bit of a Thatcher admirer from her time at London School of Economics in 78-79 and maybe you thought the same of her.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
Ben@Forest wrote:What's even weirder is that when von der Leyen said this a few days ago a significant number of EU countries had suspended use of the AZ vaccine. Why threaten to stop exporting them when you're not using them?
Because the suspension was temporary and only in a bit over half the countries, while the underdelivery covers at least 6 months.
As far as l have read the contract was for best effort only, there cannot therefore be an underdelivery. It's also notable that the UK with 66 miilion people put more money up front than the EU with 448 million people. Plus who could know how long a suspension would be? - what if the EMA was still deciding whether the AZ vaccine is safe? What if they were still deciding in April?
Ben@Forest wrote:Plus who could know how long a suspension would be? - what if the EMA was still deciding whether the AZ vaccine is safe? What if they were still deciding in April?
AZ vaccine has six months shelf life, giving ample time to move it to the countries following the advice to keep using during testing.
If AZ felt they were not getting enough money up front, they should have not signed the contract until it was put right, not signed and then claimed 30% supply to the EU while delivering 100% to the UK was best efforts. That really is not credible and if UK citizens cannot go on holidays in the EU, or if a new variant arises in the EU, then AZ's dicking about will be partly to blame.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
Ben@Forest wrote:What's even weirder is that when von der Leyen said this a few days ago a significant number of EU countries had suspended use of the AZ vaccine. Why threaten to stop exporting them when you're not using them?
Because the suspension was temporary and only in a bit over half the countries, while the underdelivery covers at least 6 months.
As far as l have read the contract was for best effort only, there cannot therefore be an underdelivery.
As far as we know the two contracts were the same. If the performance was different it could be a breach.
An interesting report on national "stay at home" compliance during 1st and 2nd lockdowns actoss Europe.
https://theconversation.com/lockdown-mobile-data-suggests-europeans-may-not-have-followed-rules-as-strictly-in-the-second-wave-154815 wrote:Lockdown: mobile data suggests Europeans may not have followed rules as strictly in the second wave ... This first graph shows how much time people have spent at home during the pandemic. In most countries, people appear to have stayed at home substantially less during the second wave (late 2020 onwards) than they did in the first (spring 2020). This is especially striking considering case rates have been higher and the weather less inviting in the second wave. ...
mjr wrote:Because the suspension was temporary and only in a bit over half the countries, while the underdelivery covers at least 6 months.
As far as l have read the contract was for best effort only, there cannot therefore be an underdelivery.
As far as we know the two contracts were the same. If the performance was different it could be a breach.
Jonathan
I had not heard that the two contracts were the same. Certainly it has been reported that UK is paying a higher price per dose that the EU (from a tweet of a price table from Belgium’s Budget State Secretary, now deleted and now refuted, except BMJ published extensive figures showing UK paying more https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n281 EU paying US$2.15 per dose, UK paying US$3 per dose). Plus the UK apparently put a lot of money into the AstraZenica production facilities in the UK.
Psamathe wrote:Certainly it has been reported that UK is paying a higher price per dose that the EU (from a tweet of a price table from Belgium’s Budget State Secretary, now deleted and now refuted, except BMJ published extensive figures showing UK paying more https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n281 EU paying US$2.15 per dose, UK paying US$3 per dose). Plus the UK apparently put a lot of money into the AstraZenica production facilities in the UK.
Production facilities in the UK which are listed as production capacity for the EU contract.
The amount the EU is paying and the amount the UK paid for capacity should be largely irrelevant. If AZ were not happy with the money being paid from the EU and the timings, then AZ should have held off signing the contract, not signed it and then relied on the "best efforts" wording and lack of sufficient penalty clauses to underdeliver. That was always going to cause big reputation damage for all involved, at best.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
Psamathe wrote:Certainly it has been reported that UK is paying a higher price per dose that the EU (from a tweet of a price table from Belgium’s Budget State Secretary, now deleted and now refuted, except BMJ published extensive figures showing UK paying more https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n281 EU paying US$2.15 per dose, UK paying US$3 per dose). Plus the UK apparently put a lot of money into the AstraZenica production facilities in the UK.
Production facilities in the UK which are listed as production capacity for the EU contract.
The amount the EU is paying and the amount the UK paid for capacity should be largely irrelevant. If AZ were not happy with the money being paid from the EU and the timings, then AZ should have held off signing the contract, not signed it and then relied on the "best efforts" wording and lack of sufficient penalty clauses to underdeliver. That was always going to cause big reputation damage for all involved, at best.
I was raising it as it illustrates that the contracts must have been different - in response to Jonathan's "As far as we know the two contracts were the same." comment as quoted in my post (the context you have cut out is relevant); not in the context of anybody being happy or unhappy and signing or not signing.
Now Boris says we'll get a third wave because the continent is infested with covid -- I think it's to have an excuse ready for the fallout from schools going back.
