What exactly is happening with AstraZeneca?

is_that_so

Bit cynical wrote: »

I think the political angle becomes clearer if we look at the UK's response. No one expects the UK to suspend AZ vaccinations in that country. Why? Because the vaccine was developed there and also because they are not embarrassed by slow rollout. Why would four cases of blood clots in Norway stop the rollout in the UK?

The types of blood clots are the key here. There have been reports of normal clots with no effect on vaccination programmes. These are rare and to find so many together warrants investigation. It may well be nothing but a short pause for the sake of transparency is not a conspiracy.

is_that_so

is_that_so wrote: »

The types of blood clots are the key here. There have been reports of normal clots with no effect on vaccination programmes. These are rare and to find so many together warrants investigation. It may well be nothing but a short pause for the sake of transparency is not a conspiracy.

I don’t think anyone is saying it’s a conspiracy. That implies some degree of preplanning. But the pause, and a potential safety issue, is not without an upside for EU governments as they’ve a deflection. And therefore are more enthusiastic than they needed to be in halting the vaccination programme. Political opportunity rather than conspiracy

is_that_so

Deleted User wrote: »

I don’t think anyone is saying it’s a conspiracy. That implies some degree of preplanning. But the pause, and a potential safety issue, is not without an upside for EU governments as they’ve a deflection. And therefore are more enthusiastic than they needed to be in halting the vaccination programme. Political opportunity rather than conspiracy

The bonus may be more people being prepared to get vaccinated, a good thing. Can't say I ever got to your line of thinking at all. Abundance of caution is really nothing new to us in this. We'll be back at it before we know it but it should also mean more AZ to go with if the feckers have delivered any!

is_that_so

is_that_so wrote: »

The bonus may be more people being prepared to get vaccinated, a good thing. Can't say I ever got to your line of thinking at all. Abundance of caution is really nothing new to us in this. We'll be back at it before we know it but it should also mean more AZ to go with if the feckers have delivered any!

Excessive overcaution IMO, explainable only by political weakness

I anticipate the programme recommencing with no new evidence presented whatsoever. Which would evidence that the decision to pause was not based on any science

fly_agaric

Deleted User wrote: »

I don’t think anyone is saying it’s a conspiracy. That implies some degree of preplanning. But the pause, and a potential safety issue, is not without an upside for EU governments as they’ve a deflection. And therefore are more enthusiastic than they needed to be in halting the vaccination programme. Political opportunity rather than conspiracy

Sounds like a load of made up bull****.
I'm not seeing any upsides here really but maybe I'm not as clever.
It is a mess really.

The vaccination programmes are not halted as AZ vaccine is only a part (and unfortunately a shrinking rather than a growing part) of supply for these programmes.

All countries "pausing" use will do is make a bad situation worse for them if it becomes permanent, or if they "unpause" they'll have a temporary glut of AZ vaccine due to the couple of weeks they paused.

This will be quickly administered I'd say as the current constraint on the Irish programme (and probably others) is entirely the fact that AZ cannot and probably will never be able to supply the amounts it promised to the EU. Put the blame for that on the EU procurement process or the Saint-like MNC if you wish, it does not change anything.

Certainly in Ireland, I don't think confidence will be badly damaged if the all clear is given and any AZ vaccine we have will be used up fast afterwards.

astrofool

There is no downside to countries pausing the rollout while they verify that the vaccine didn't cause the problems. The supply will be used up very quickly once unpaused, and has no impact to the overall vaccination schedule timelines.

If there was massive supply, and we were constrained on the vaccinator side, then it would cause a timeline slippage.

There was pauses during the trials, there will probably be future pauses for other vaccines, the authorities hope that in a weeks time everyone is saying they were too cautious because they want to be too cautious, they want people to have complete faith in the vaccines, and full transparency when anything untoward happens.

is_that_so

Deleted User wrote: »

Excessive overcaution IMO, explainable only by political weakness

I anticipate the programme recommencing with no new evidence presented whatsoever. Which would evidence that the decision to pause was not based on any science

Maybe, but that there has been no evidence to date doesn't mean there isn't any evidence here. Once they've look at it they should be able to say. As other posters have suggested it may just add an extra proviso to the vaccination protocols. That in itself is something learnt.

is_that_so

is_that_so wrote: »

Maybe, but that there has been no evidence to date doesn't mean there isn't any evidence here. Once they've look at it they should be able to say. As other posters have suggested it may just add an extra proviso to the vaccination protocols. That in itself is something learnt.

we will never agree. I would take in into my arm tomorrow. IMO is a completely unnecessary overreaction, and reflects badly on the politicians (who have clearly just followed each other like falling dominos, without a mind of their own) and will more likely damage confidence than improve it.

Luckily I'll be able to avail of the UK programme and will be getting my AZ shot next month.

Bit cynical

astrofool wrote: »

There is no downside to countries pausing the rollout while they verify that the vaccine didn't cause the problems. The supply will be used up very quickly once unpaused, and has no impact to the overall vaccination schedule timelines.

These pauses I would only expect to happen in countries that have messed up procurement in some way. Israel, for example, I don't see pausing as they are well ahead of other countries.

is_that_so

Bit cynical wrote: »

These pauses I would only expect to happen in countries that have messed up procurement in some way. Israel, for example, I don't see pausing as they are well ahead of other countries.

They also only have one vaccine and are an extended trial for Pfizer!

Strazdas

Deleted User wrote: »

to deflect from their own mismanagement of the vaccine rollout. Convenient to point to safety concerns and paint themselves as cautious rather than incompetent.

Wouldn't that only draw attention to vaccine delays and make it a big story, rather than keep it off the front pages?

brickster69

15 million AZ doses currently sat in Fridges in Europe.

astrofool

brickster69 wrote: »

15 million AZ doses currently sat in Fridges in Europe.

30M in fridges in the USA.

What a f*ck up by AstraZeneca, from badly run trials, to glitchy production schedules, snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

The Oxford Vaccine Institute must be cursing Hancock's name whenever they hear it, trusting their work to a company with no vaccine experience.

astrofool

astrofool wrote: »

30M in fridges in the USA.

What a f*ck up by AstraZeneca, from badly run trials, to glitchy production schedules, snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

The Oxford Vaccine Institute must be cursing Hancock's name whenever they hear it, trusting their work to a company with no vaccine experience.

And yet 20m odd doses administered in the UK alone with a resulting collapse in cases serious illness and deaths. Looking forward to getting it next month

Yeh, bad job Astra Zeneca

Wolf359f

[Deleted User] wrote: »

And yet 20m odd doses administered in the UK alone with a resulting collapse in cases serious illness and deaths. Looking forward to getting it next month

Yeh, bad job Astra Zeneca

AZ only accounts for ~40% of administered doses in the UK. That should change when they get their Indian delivery though.

is_that_so

astrofool wrote: »

30M in fridges in the USA.

What a f*ck up by AstraZeneca, from badly run trials, to glitchy production schedules, snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

The Oxford Vaccine Institute must be cursing Hancock's name whenever they hear it, trusting their work to a company with no vaccine experience.

Think you can blame Trump for that. Fear of what he might do with Merck was the main reason Hancock blocked it. Mind you, Biden has his own version of that with the stockpiling of the unapproved AZ and no sign of them even applying.

RGS

Sam Russell wrote: »

If it turns out there is a problem, and a person suffers from this blood clotting, giving rise to long term harm, who do hey sue, and who pays?

I think this issue has a lot to do with this. If the EMA says all is OK, yet again, then no liability.

The state are on the hook for any compensation as the state provided an indemnity to the manufacturers of all vaccines. My understanding is all states indemnified the manufacturers.

Strazdas

Deleted User wrote: »

And yet 20m odd doses administered in the UK alone with a resulting collapse in cases serious illness and deaths. Looking forward to getting it next month

Yeh, bad job Astra Zeneca

I've heard that only 11m AZ doses have been administered in Britain (meaning that the majority are imported Pfizer and Moderna doses). You'd be hard pushed to find a word about this in the UK press or from the Tories - they want people to think GB is manufacturing all its own vaccines.

robinph

RGS wrote: »

The state are on the hook for any compensation as the state provided an indemnity to the manufacturers of all vaccines. My understanding is all states indemnified the manufacturers.

Which I think just shows that stopping distribution when it is going to encourage the anti vax movements locally is the wrong move (not so much for Ireland which doesn't have that problem).
The potential cost of paying out a couple of insurance claims, against the continuing shutdown of a countries entire economy are not even on same scale. The decimal point in between those two numbers wouldn't be on the same page of the chequebook when figuring out the costs.

Maybe it won't make any difference to the take up of vaccination in Europe, but I really can't see how this is helping when they are starting from such a bad position anyway.

Strazdas

Strazdas wrote: »

Wouldn't that only draw attention to vaccine delays and make it a big story, rather than keep it off the front pages?

Yes I think it will draw attention. And result in higher vaccine skepticism. Even if approved again later this week there’s nothing like a couple of days of talk of blood clots and safety to get vaccine sceptics over the line. Should have been kept in house until there was scientific evidence either way. Instead, yet again, the EU shoots itself in its collective feet

robinph

Strazdas wrote: »

I've heard that only 11m AZ doses have been administered in Britain (meaning that the majority are imported Pfizer and Moderna doses). You'd be hard pushed to find a word about this in the UK press or from the Tories - they want people to think GB is manufacturing all its own vaccines.

It quite clearly shows on most articles about the vaccine supply on the BBC site where the doses are being produced and delivered from, and it doesn't hide that they are coming from the EU.

The latest numbers I saw showed about 55% of the vaccination total so far to be Pfizer with the same quantity of doses being delivered each week from both Pfizer and Astra Zeneca. But of variation in previous weeks.

Wolf359f

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Yes I think it will draw attention. And result in higher vaccine skepticism. Even if approved again later this week there’s nothing like a couple of days of talk of blood clots and safety to get vaccine sceptics over the line. Should have been kept in house until there was scientific evidence either way. Instead, yet again, the EU shoots itself in its collective feet

You want a non EU member (Norway) to keep safety concerns from their own public to appease the EU?
Norway have already said they will conduct their own investigation and will not rely on the EMA's findings on Thursday.
So you would have a non EU member suspending the vaccination all while the EU member states would be trying to hide the information/reason why from the public. Sounds like that would not be in anyone's best interest.

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

And yet 20m odd doses administered in the UK alone with a resulting collapse in cases serious illness and deaths. Looking forward to getting it next month

Yeh, bad job Astra Zeneca

Not to mention the millions that have already been shipped through Covax in to Africa.

Wolf359f

Wolf359f wrote: »

You want a non EU member (Norway) to keep safety concerns from their own public to appease the EU?
Norway have already said they will conduct their own investigation and will not rely on the EMA's findings on Thursday.
So you would have a non EU member suspending the vaccination all while the EU member states would be trying to hide the information/reason why from the public. Sounds like that would not be in anyone's best interest.

If there is no scientific evidence then yes. And according to the EMA there is no evidence. The pause of the vaccine rollout will cause deaths as well, remember

Pete_Cavan

robinph wrote: »

It quite clearly shows on most articles about the vaccine supply on the BBC site where the doses are being produced and delivered from, and it doesn't hide that they are coming from the EU.

The latest numbers I saw showed about 55% of the vaccination total so far to be Pfizer with the same quantity of doses being delivered each week from both Pfizer and Astra Zeneca. But of variation in previous weeks.

A portion of the AZ doses in the UK have also been produced in Europe. There is an AZ subcontractor manufacturing plant in the Netherlands named in the AZ/EU contract working away but AZ have yet to apply for EMA approval for it yet, despite being encouraged to do so.

Natterjack from Kerry

Deleted User wrote: »

If there is no scientific evidence then yes. And according to the EMA there is no evidence. The pause of the vaccine rollout will cause deaths as well, remember

Care needed with scientific agencies when they mention 'no scientific evidence'. We can still conclude that expert specialist medical opinion does probably feel there is a link between the reactions and the vaccine.

Its a bit like when they said there was no evidence that wearing masks limited the spread of the virus. Scientifically, it was a true statement - no studies had been done! They did it to protect supplies to medical personnel without having to lie. So it was the right thing to do. But deliberately misleading to the layman.

Given the bad bad news stalling AZ is, it was for sure not taken lightly - and without evidence. With the risk from Covid, the fuel to antivaxers, the delays to public programmes with EU politicians already under severe pressure, there is surely plenty of unofficial 'scientific evidence' behind it, even if not the strict scientific evidence.
On balance, the issue will be one of fear and acceptance. They will likely come down on the side of despite the risk, it being a lower risk than not taking it. But the problem will be people saying - that may be so, but Ill wait for a Pfizer or J&J please.

Dr. Em

Consider this: if Austria, Denmark, Norway, Germany, the Netherlands and other counties who have logged blood clotting incidents compare their data and find, for the sake of example, that everyone effected was taking medication for severe migraines and then announce that anyone on that medication should stop taking it prior to being vaccinated, and thereafter cases of thrombosis become even rarer, would that not be a positive? Yes, you could argue that these incidents are already rare enough that it doesn't warrant suspending the vaccination programme while the investigation is underway, but it would be morally wrong for a regulator not to investigate reports of severe complications and deaths, even if they are rare, and even if they turn out to be coincidental to the vaccine. This is good medical practice.

Danzy

Jim2007 wrote: »

Yes, monitored by the vendor and the government that has the most to loose if it goes wrong. I'd like a lot more authority than that in the monitoring thanks very much.



.




Yes and I will be getting my first jab on Thursday.

It's open information, open data. It's still one of the most transparent vaccine programs in history.

Good job, may your immune system be ready to hop hard off everything shortly.

Lady Spangles

Deleted User wrote: »

Its ass covering by weak politicians. I don't believe for one moment that national vaccination bodies are not acting under direction from their governments

Someone else on another thread has suggesting it could even be pharma companies interfering because AstraZeneca is non-profit, thus eating into their potential profits. I don't know if that's just conspiracy theorists kicking off, though, NGL.

All I know is my 71 year old father's had his first dose of the AZ vaccine and it's a massive weight off my mind to know he's got some protection from a virus that will kill him if he gets it. He had rough side effects, but nothing so serious as suspected clots.

Pete_Cavan

Lady Spangles wrote: »

Someone else on another thread has suggesting it could even be pharma companies interfering because AstraZeneca is non-profit, thus eating into their potential profits. I don't know if that's just conspiracy theorists kicking off, though, NGL.

Thats pure conspiracy theory, AZ are doing a great job of undermining themselves and making competitors look good without the other companies having to get their hands dirty.