What exactly is happening with AstraZeneca?

HalfAndHalf wrote: »

Perhaps, if it proves to be true, however I find the timing of the release extremely suspect, and for all the faults the U.K. scientists are some of the best in the world, they’ve seen the data and they’ve had weeks or rollout data to confirm.

You’ve got to question why the EU have been stamping their feet so hard at only getting 30 million doses of it’s not even good enough to use on 20% of the EU population.

Well the thing about the rollout is that we were told that you need the first dose, plus a top-up and then a follow up a few weeks later and then after that it reaches maximum efficacy.

There was also something at one stage that the UK were going to delay the second dose so as to get more people the first dose.

So they might still not have a "theoretically fully vaccinated" sample to test yet.

CrabRevolution wrote: »

I know the Telegraph have a poor reputation, but you'd imagine they'd at least try and fake having more sources when they want an "expert" to criticise the EU. Ray Bassett gets wheeled out at every opportunity to criticise everything about the EU from a purportedly Irish perspective. Telegraph readers must think he is some form of all powerful megacelebrity in Ireland given how they seek his in depth expertise on everything Irish.

Well to be fair, he is a former Ambassador to Canada.

It's well known that even compared to other former Ambassadors, former Ambassadors to Canada are particularly expert on infectious diseases.

Hurrache wrote: »

Lol, yeah, bad EU.

I never said the sources had no data to back it up.

No you said they don’t have to back it up, you’d think they would in the scheme of things seeing as these are peoples lives they’re talking about but I guess we’ll see then. You seriously don’t think the timing is suspect no? Mass stamping of feet earlier now the Bilt ‘understand that the EMA in four days time will only approve for use in under 65’s.’

Maybe I’m a cynic but to me that’s very suspect.

HalfAndHalf wrote: »

The fact is, we’re still waiting and others aren’t. If you’re happy with that then so be it, I’m not.

This is it.

The EU is currently on track to hit 70% of population done by 2024.

Many others are aiming for that, at current rates, for end of this Summer.

It's not that the EU is a bit behind or hampered by external challenges. It's a profound difference now and no level of Jingoism will distract from the metrics if those who have been dosed and what that tells.

We all surely agree that the EU is a rich and powerful block globally and that Covid 19 and its impact have presented the most stark economic crisis in decades, probably since the end of WW2.

Pity that urgency isn't manifest in Brussels.

HalfAndHalf wrote: »

No you said they don’t have to back it up, you’d think they would in the scheme of things seeing as these are peoples lives they’re talking about but I guess we’ll see then. You seriously don’t think the timing is suspect no? Mass stamping of feet earlier now the Bilt ‘understand that the EMA in four days time will only approve for use in under 65’s.’

Maybe I’m a cynic but to me that’s very suspect.

What are you suspicious of?

If they don't approve it for over 65's it will still be valid for most of the population and they can prioritise the other ones for over 65's. They still have the same amount of people to vaccinate.

HalfAndHalf wrote: »

No you said they don’t have to back it up, you’d think they would in the scheme of things seeing as these are peoples lives they’re talking about but I guess we’ll see then. You seriously don’t think the timing is suspect no? Mass stamping of feet earlier now the Bilt ‘understand that the EMA in four days time will only approve for use in under 65’s.’

Maybe I’m a cynic but to me that’s very suspect.

I didn't say that either.

My post was very simple, I said Germany or the EMA don't need to provide data to back up the story.

Donald Trump wrote: »

Well the thing about the rollout is that we were told that you need the first dose, plus a top-up and then a follow up a few weeks later and then after that it reaches maximum efficacy.

There was also something at one stage that the UK were going to delay the second dose so as to get more people the first dose.

So they might still not have a "theoretically fully vaccinated" sample to test yet.

Well according to this AZ tested the highest percentage of over 70’s.

https://www.thejournal.ie/factfind-vaccine-trial-age-efficacy-older-people-5286119-Dec2020/

Only those in the know will really know so time will tell.

On one hand It's terrible that the EU are stamping their feet about not getting what they financed and ordered, but

Danzy wrote: »

Pity that urgency isn't manifest in Brussels.

?!?

Donald Trump wrote: »

What are you suspicious of?

If they don't approve it for over 65's it will still be valid for most of the population and they can prioritise the other ones for over 65's. They still have the same amount of people to vaccinate.

Ive made that clear. The timing of this Bild unknown source story the evening of a massive falling out with AZ over delivery amounts.

That’s like me kicking off that my Ferrari is gonna be 3 months late and then telling people they’re rubbish anyway and don’t even go as fast as they say it does.

It it’s just my opinion, clearly I’m more suspicious.

Also, I can’t afford a Ferrari

HalfAndHalf wrote: »

Well according to this AZ tested the highest percentage of over 70’s.

https://www.thejournal.ie/factfind-vaccine-trial-age-efficacy-older-people-5286119-Dec2020/

Only those in the know will really know so time will tell.

Yeah, there's no real point me and you arguing over it.

I understand the desire to possibly take a calculated risk on one side, and the desire to check and check and check again before giving the go ahead on the other side.

Let the boffins do their stuff. If they make a bollix of it then sure they make a bollix of it. But there is less of a chance of them making a bollix of it than you or I spinning the wheel and taking a guess.

HalfAndHalf wrote: »

Ive made that clear. The timing of this Bild unknown source story the evening of a massive falling out with AZ over delivery amounts.

Der Bild had nothing to do with the falling out between the EU and AZ being a story.

Hurrache wrote: »

Der Bild had nothing to do with the falling out between the EU and AZ being a story.

No one said they did, why would you even say that! Bild printed the story on the over-65s.

HalfAndHalf wrote: »

Ive made that clear. The timing of this Bild unknown source story the evening of a massive falling out with AZ over delivery amounts.

That’s like me kicking off that my Ferrari is gonna be 3 months late and then telling people they’re rubbish anyway and don’t even go as fast as they say it does.

It it’s just my opinion, clearly I’m more suspicious.

But I don't see any real impact if it is not approved for over 65's.

They can use it on the under 65's.

If they are right (they may or may not be) then suppose the UK gave 500k doses to over 65's, sure that's effectively 500k doses wasted. Because they'd need to go back and give them a different one and those 500k could have protected a heap of under 65's.

I mean even if they restrict it to u65's they don't have "enough". They still need what they ordered and more. The just need to make sure that they keep back enough of the other ones for over 65s now.

Donald Trump wrote: »

But I don't see any real impact if it is not approved for over 65's.

They can use it on the under 65's.

If they are right (they may or may not be) then suppose the UK gave 500k doses to over 65's, sure that's effectively 500k doses wasted. Because they'd need to go back and give them a different one and those 500k could have protected a heap of under 65's.

I mean even if they restrict it to u65's they don't have "enough". They still need what they ordered and more. The just need to make sure that they keep back enough of the other ones for over 65s now.

Agreed, if the story had come out last week I’d have taken it a lot more seriously than tonight after all the giving out.

HalfAndHalf wrote: »

Well according to this AZ tested the highest percentage of over 70’s.

https://www.thejournal.ie/factfind-vaccine-trial-age-efficacy-older-people-5286119-Dec2020/

Only those in the know will really know so time will tell.

The Astra Zeneca study also said that immune response was comparable in the two older groups as it was in the youngest.

So the 8% Claim needs to be viewed skeptically at the moment, until proof given.

average_runner

Boris trying to pull one over Europe. Time to hit the uk hard.

Pigeon Chaser

Ah, time to forget about AZ and invest in Sputnik...

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Reads like your a shill for AZ shouting down any/all critism and dismissing the biggest emerging story in the eu tonight out of hand based simply on their word

Something stinks about all involved conduct here...i wouldnt be encouraging anyone to take this until its ironed out....fighting over distribution,clear implications of improprity of astra,now claims as low as 8% effective in over 65s

Well that isn’t what I’m going for, to be honest I’m amazed I seem to be the only one saying this is suspect at best timing.

How would it explain the U.K. scientists completely missing this data.
How would it explain AZ getting away with submitting false data
How would it explain the EMA taking until today to discover the data submitted was incorrect.

Something doesn’t add up. Surely it’s not just me who thinks that?!?

Widdensushi

I doubt if it suddenly becomes less efficient on your 65th birthday, I doubt many over 40 would be volunteering for that vaccine when they could wait for another.

Hurrache wrote: »

On one hand It's terrible that the EU are stamping their feet about not getting what they financed and ordered, but

?!?

Did you mean to quote some one else?

My only concern is that the EU is falling so far in the vaccine problem.

It's not just occurred this week or with Astra Zeneca.

It's refreshing to see some anger tonight, badly needed and hopefully a sign that there will be a Volte-face in attitudes and seriousness on this.

There is a growing risk now that the EU will be facing another wave next Autumn or longer restrictions than others due to the mess now developing and that isn't down to just Astra Zeneca.

...Ghost...

HalfAndHalf wrote: »

Well that isn’t what I’m going for, to be honest I’m amazed I seem to be the only one saying this is suspect at best timing.

How would it explain the U.K. scientists completely missing this data.
How would it explain AZ getting away with surmising false data
How would it explain the EMA taking until today to discover the data submitted was incorrect.

Something doesn’t add up. Surely it’s not just me who thinks that?!?

It does seem like you're shilling tbh. To answer your questions...i'm gonna use more words

The UK has some of the best scientists (as do Europe). But the scientists are under UK government pressure. Fill in the blanks as to why.

Data can be falsified and rubber stamped by Governments. Think Olympics and Russia.

Perhaps the EMA were already aware of data inconsistencies which is partly the reason for the delay in approval.

hatrickpatrick

...Ghost... wrote: »

The UK has some of the best scientists (as do Europe). But the scientists are under UK government pressure. Fill in the blanks as to why.

My issue with this angle is, why are we to assume that the UK's scientists would be spineless yes-men who would allow their independence to be trampled upon by the government? Governments putting independents individuals or organisations under pressure to deliver a particular outcome doesn't have to lead to those organisations necessarily complying with such demands.

In Ireland, it more often than not seems to. I don't know if this is the case in other countries but I have no reason to assume that it is - I've always assumed that Ireland's issue with this is down to how socially tiny the upper echelons are and therefore how personal these things become. I doubt that's the case in a country with a significantly larger population. But I have no evidence either way.

This angle, on the other hand, is based entirely on the assumption that organisations in the UK do, indeed, kowtow to politicians running their mouths.

...Ghost... wrote: »

It does seem like you're shilling tbh. To answer your questions...i'm gonna use more words

The UK has some of the best scientists (as do Europe). But the scientists are under UK government pressure. Fill in the blanks as to why.

Data can be falsified and rubber stamped by Governments. Think Olympics and Russia.

Perhaps the EMA were already aware of data inconsistencies which is partly the reason for the delay in approval.

So, my view being that it’s suspect timing to release currently unsubstantiated data is one side, the other view is that we’re saying the U.K. half of AZ have falsified figures, under instruction of the U.K. scientists on the orders of the U.K. government in the presumable hope that no one else would order the vaccine and therefore find out.

I’ll happily admit I’m wrong, it happens a lot just ask the wife, if it turns out that the over 65’s efficacy is only 8% but Jesus, that’s some alternative theory!

Widdensushi wrote: »

I doubt if it suddenly becomes less efficient on your 65th birthday, I doubt many over 40 would be volunteering for that vaccine when they could wait for another.

I'd say that if you offered it to any 45 year old non-vaccine-skeptic in June and said "you can have this one now or wait til August for the other one" that they'd chance their arm with that one!

...Ghost... wrote: »

It does seem like you're shilling tbh. To answer your questions...i'm gonna use more words

The UK has some of the best scientists (as do Europe). But the scientists are under UK government pressure. Fill in the blanks as to why.

Data can be falsified and rubber stamped by Governments. Think Olympics and Russia.

Perhaps the EMA were already aware of data inconsistencies which is partly the reason for the delay in approval.

Aren't you just Shilling in the opposite way and adding in lots of buts and perhaps.

It's not a replay of Brexit threads, as much as some think it is.

In the biggest economic, social and health crisis globally since the end of WW2, the EU is falling way behind in vaccinations compared to others and it is now to a degree that that risks 2021 being a milder replay of last year for the EU while others put it behind them.

The numbers are all that matters in this.

That's all there is.

Donald Trump wrote: »

I'd say that if you offered it to any 45 year old non-vaccine-skeptic in June and said "you can have this one now or wait til August for the other one" that they'd chance their arm with that one!

I’m 42 and I’d bite an arm off to get it tbh.