What exactly is happening with AstraZeneca?

MrMusician18 · 27-01-2021 01:15PM

greyday wrote: »

How about if he told you he would do your kitchen if his other jobs went to plan without ANY HOLDUPS, you might be annoyed but you were warned, most rational people would accept they could be let down when you know for a fact the supplier has a lot of prepaid orders to fill before you have even put in an order.....ah but its his fault, same ways its pfizers fault the EU put in their orders 5 months after the USA, Its AZ fault that EU put in their orders later than the UK....feck sake, they messed up and need to accept it.

The contracts a supplier has with a third party are not your concern.

Red Silurian · 27-01-2021 01:15PM

I don't think the EU are refusing outright to buy the Russian or the Chinese vaccines, they have simply bought enough already to vaccinate the entire EU population from the other 6 manufacturers... However if the companies applied for EMA authorisation and the EMA were happy with the results and subsequently gave approval then there is no reason why national governments couldn't buy from them as it wouldn't be against the EU wide deal

Pete_Cavan · 27-01-2021 01:18PM

greyday wrote: »

How about if he told you he would do your kitchen if his other jobs went to plan without ANY HOLDUPS, you might be annoyed but you were warned, most rational people would accept they could be let down when you know for a fact the supplier has a lot of prepaid orders to fill before you have even put in an order.....ah but its his fault, same ways its pfizers fault the EU put in their orders 5 months after the USA, Its AZ fault that EU put in their orders later than the UK....feck sake, they messed up and need to accept it.

If there was a delivery schedule in the contract, thats all that matters. Some people here seem to think the contract says "we'll get to ya when we get to ya".

McGiver · 27-01-2021 01:21PM

colmtheperson wrote: »

I don't think the EU are refusing outright to buy the Russian or the Chinese vaccines, they have simply bought enough already to vaccinate the entire EU population from the other 6 manufacturers... However if the companies applied for EMA authorisation and the EMA were happy with the results and subsequently gave approval then there is no reason why national governments couldn't buy from them as it wouldn't be against the EU wide deal

Sinovac is an old tech - attenuated virus or parts of it (protein) AFAIK. Efficacy is reportedly 50%....

mick087 · 27-01-2021 01:24PM

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Thats correct. The original concept was fundamentally based on it being open license too so that obviously only changed when AZ, at the instigation of Bill Gates, was brought on board.

The deal with AZ is that once the pandemic is officially declared over, by the WHO presumably, then they will be free to set a higher price and start generating a profit. So it's not really in their interests to have any delays in roll out, as it's going to cost them money. So while i applaud oxford for their original vision, granting exclusive rights to one pharma firm was always a compromise of that original goal.

The original concept was good now i fear changes to its roll out.

Its such a shame that the world did not get its act together and come together on this.

9db3xj7z41fs5u · 27-01-2021 01:24PM

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

If there was a delivery schedule in the contract, thats all that matters. Some people here seem to think the contract says "we'll get to ya when we get to ya".

So true! If we created a new thread on boards, with the predicament outlined “help, my old kitchen is no longer functional, and I need a new one. I hired a builder who said that he would get it done on X date. I bought him some materials for my kitchen. Now he said that he has a backlog and doesn’t know when he will get to it. I have nowhere to cook my food now. And the materials I bought were used for my neighbour’s kitchen. What do I do?” people would not be so sympathetic to the builder. Be honest.

Joe_ Public · 27-01-2021 01:33PM

mick087 wrote: »

The original concept was good now i fear changes to its roll out.

Its such a shame that the world did not get its act together and come together on this.

This is Adrian Hill of Oxford/Jenner quoted in a New York Times interview last April:

“I personally don’t believe that in a time of pandemic there should be exclusive licenses,” Professor Hill said. “So we are asking a lot of them. Nobody is going to make a lot of money off this.”

Question is why did that change? Bill Gates is obviously a powerful figure when it comes to Oxford research and development, so we can only speculate what pressures were brought to bear. Maybe the oxford people, being merely brilliant scientists and innovators, were simply naive when it came to the world of business and profit turning. Dont know really, but seems a shame what happened regardless.

eoinbn · 27-01-2021 01:35PM

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

If there was a delivery schedule in the contract, thats all that matters. Some people here seem to think the contract says "we'll get to ya when we get to ya".

If they don't have the vaccine then they don't have the vaccine.
If they don't have it because of yield issues, the most likely reason, then the EU needs to walk it back a bit.
If they don't have it because they sent it all over the world from the EU plants then the EU can go nuclear.

9db3xj7z41fs5u · 27-01-2021 01:41PM

eoinbn wrote: »

If they don't have the vaccine then they don't have the vaccine.
If they don't have it because of yield issues, the most likely reason, then the EU needs to walk it back a bit.
If they don't have it because they sent it all over the world from the EU plants then the EU can go nuclear.

I think that even in the latter case, they will cover it up, and we the little people will suffer.

Lab processes yield a fairly predictable number of doses. They must have calculated the manpower, raw products, etc needed to fulfil the order. It’s not rocket science. How could their calculation be so much greater than the present reality? What is the variable, driving the relative paucity of current vaccines?

Renault 5 · 27-01-2021 01:44PM

This is from RTE

EU spokesperson:

It said that it invested huge sums in AstraZeneca's facilities for the very purpose of ensuring that production would be at full capacity and that supplies would be delivered on time.

Tinfoil hat.

I wonder if AZ used the money from the EU to invest in their UK facility to fix the issues there instead of the Dutch and Belgian ffacilities.

Melanchthon · 27-01-2021 01:45PM

Evan Rich Storefront wrote: »

Lab processes yield a fairly predictable number of doses. They must have calculated the manpower, raw products, etc needed to fulfil the order. It’s not rocket science. How could their calculation be so much greater than the present reality? What is the variable, driving the relative paucity of current vaccines?

Isn't the issue that, for the older type (Oxford, Sputnik etc) vaccines they are running big bioreactors filled with cell cultures which do have a variable yield and are finicky and they are setting up very fast compared to normal.

For the newer ones its very delicate and more experimental.

mick087 · 27-01-2021 01:46PM

Joe_ Public wrote: »

This is Adrian Hill of Oxford/Jenner quoted in a New York Times interview last April:

“I personally don’t believe that in a time of pandemic there should be exclusive licenses,” Professor Hill said. “So we are asking a lot of them. Nobody is going to make a lot of money off this.”

Question is why did that change? Bill Gates is obviously a powerful figure when it comes to Oxford research and development, so we can only speculate what pressures were brought to bear. Maybe the oxford people, being merely brilliant scientists and innovators, were simply naive when it came to the world of business and profit turning. Dont know really, but seems a shame what happened regardless.

Adrian Hill is right imo there should be no exclusive licenses.
But this is not how the world or society we have created works.
Rich Powerful figures rarely if ever do anything for the improvement of man kind, unlike the those who worked on the vaccine would do good for all.

What has happened is sad and now we see the start of the blame game, World in crisis yet time to play the ole blame game.

Pete_Cavan · 27-01-2021 01:47PM

eoinbn wrote: »

If they don't have the vaccine then they don't have the vaccine.
If they don't have it because of yield issues, the most likely reason, then the EU needs to walk it back a bit.
If they don't have it because they sent it all over the world from the EU plants then the EU can go nuclear.

Yes and that's where the "best efforts" thing raised by the AZ CEO comes in, if they can prove they made their best efforts but things outside their control (of which there are many at the present time) prevented them from meeting targets, then they will be alright. Fro. The EUs reaction, they seem pretty sure that best efforts were not being made, possibly even reducing efforts for the EU in order to facilitate others.

9db3xj7z41fs5u · 27-01-2021 01:48PM

Melanchthon wrote: »

Isn't the issue that, for the older type (Oxford, Sputnik etc) vaccines they are running big bioreactors filled with cell cultures which do have a variable yield and are finicky and they are setting up very fast compared to normal.

For the newer ones its very delicate and more experimental.

I cannot imagine that their statisticians didn’t factor in this significant variable when calculating the yield. It is strange that this has only become an issue post the signing of the contract.

I also find it strange how the supply shock only occurred in a European lab and nowhere else. Their reasons are flimsy

Donald Trump · 27-01-2021 01:52PM

mick087 wrote: »

Leroy42 wrote: »

Now, one can take either side, but IMO it is worrying how much power companies like AZ have and how they are able to drive even an organisation like the EU. This is about far more than this vaccine.

Good post

Sure we'd be better off out of the EU. Ireland would have much more power to teach the likes of AZ some manners if it was on its own. We could send both of the Healys Rae over to sort them out fairly lively.

Melanchthon · 27-01-2021 01:56PM

Evan Rich Storefront wrote: »

I cannot imagine that their statisticians didn’t factor in this significant variable when calculating the yield. It is strange that this has only become an issue post the signing of the contract.

I also find it strange how the supply shock only occurred in a European lab and nowhere else. Their reasons are flimsy

It did effect the UK too, they were meant to have millions of doses ready to go late last year.
The more I read details about figures it does seem your right though about Astra Zeneca did massively over promise to everyone.
I am not a process engineer though, sure there is people like that on boards though.

https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-qa-how-much-coronavirus-vaccine-do-we-have

9db3xj7z41fs5u · 27-01-2021 02:03PM

I would love to see if all the other countries, as well as the UK (such as India, Argentina, Dominican Republic, Morocco, Mexico and El Salvador) who have approved the Astra vaccine, have received significantly (60% less) doses of the vaccine.

mick087 · 27-01-2021 02:07PM

Donald Trump wrote: »

Sure we'd be better off out of the EU. Ireland would have much more power to teach the likes of AZ some manners if it was on its own. We could send both of the Healys Rae over to sort them out fairly lively.

Why would anyone one want to teach them a lesson?

What have the elected TDS for constituency of Kerry the Healys Raes got to do with it?

fly_agaric · 27-01-2021 02:13PM

Melanchthon wrote: »

The funny thing is the posters here that won't ever here a bad thing said about the EU are trying to claim the moral and factual highground.
Earlier in the thread the Peston twitter post about signing dates was called out as being incorrect fake news, with no links to documents to counter his point.

Then it turns out the Peston post was actually broadly correct and there was a 3 month gap, what happens here, people double down on it being fake news despite it being broadly correct.
And its the other people that are the simpletons :rolleyes:

I didn't know much about the time line before reading this thread and the discussions here but I think there seems to be confusion between the "Inclusive Vaccine Alliance" efforts you mention where it looks like something or other was "agreed" with the company during June (already posted)

https://www.euractiv.com/section/coronavirus/news/coalition-of-countries-aims-to-keep-covid-19-vaccine-manufacturing-in-europe/

then the supplanting of that (all the Alliance states are EU members) by the EU level negotiations with the company resulting in a sign off on an EU agreeement in August:

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_20_1524

As others have said, in a way, this is all a bit of a side issue (IMO) apart from making UK-EU comparisons or political arguments about same.

Leroy42 wrote: »

MO it is worrying how much power companies like AZ have and how they are able to drive even an organisation like the EU. This is about far more than this vaccine.

Yeah, the power that the multinationals have garnered (and the arrogance they and the people who lead them have) is shocking + the pandemic is probably making it even worse.
They are approaching Kim Stanley Robinson "TransNat" levels of clout now.

27-01-2021 02:19PM

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

Yes and that's where the "best efforts" thing raised by the AZ CEO comes in, if they can prove they made their best efforts but things outside their control (of which there are many at the present time) prevented them from meeting targets, then they will be alright. Fro. The EUs reaction, they seem pretty sure that best efforts were not being made, possibly even reducing efforts for the EU in order to facilitate others.

Pure speculation. Aside from this, the EU's strategy to date has been a total failure. Just yesterday they came out and said the EMA could not grant emergency authorisation as the UK did, that was down to member states. Stephen Donnelly said back in December this wasn't the case and that they had to work in tandem with our EU neighbours.

Had we gone ahead on our own steam and emergency authorised the Astra Zeneca vaccine then we'd be in a far better place now - would have saved a lot of lives. If this isn't an emergency then what is ????

Meanwhile Germany did a side deal for 30 million extra doses of the Pfizer vaccine - crickets from the Commission.
They also ordered 200,000 "Trump antibodies" from Regeneron in another side deal - again crickets from the Commission.

We're all in this together my ass.

Pfizer announce delay in production - "that's grand lads, it happens to the best of us" from the Commission.
Astra Zeneca announce the same - and remember the EMA HASN'T EVEN APPROVED the AZ vaccine yet - HOW DARE YOU BREACH CONTRACT !!!!! And by the way, they probably didn't breach contract.

And as for the cost:
Pfizer: $20 per dose.
Moderna: $10 to $50 per dose.
AstraZeneca: under $4 per dose.

Had we gone with Astra Zeneca emergency approval, we'd be up there with the UK and Israel, and have a much lower cost. Remind me again how the EMA and the EU have helped here exactly?

Joe_ Public · 27-01-2021 02:20PM

Melanchthon wrote: »

It did effect the UK too, they were meant to have millions of doses ready to go late last year.
The more I read details about figures it does seem your right though about Astra Zeneca did massively over promise to everyone.
I am not a process engineer though, sure there is people like that on boards though.

https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-qa-how-much-coronavirus-vaccine-do-we-have

AZ were talking of having a manufacturing capacity of 3 billion doses by the end of the year. I don't know if that sounds credible based on what is happening right now. I thought it might be contingent on the indian based SII making doses for the asian and african markets, but then i read a line in an Irish Times piece where a SII spokesman talks about their intention to make a mere 100m doses which would barely put a dent in the overall target.

MrMusician18 · 27-01-2021 02:21PM

eoinbn wrote: »

If they don't have the vaccine then they don't have the vaccine.
If they don't have it because of yield issues, the most likely reason, then the EU needs to walk it back a bit.
If they don't have it because they sent it all over the world from the EU plants then the EU can go nuclear.

Is probably a mixture of both. They are likely suffering from genuine yield problems and management propensity to over-promise.

It seems then they decided, as a result of these problems to underdeliver the EU contract.

9db3xj7z41fs5u · 27-01-2021 02:24PM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Pure speculation. Aside from this, the EU's strategy to date has been a total failure. Just yesterday they came out and said the EMA could not grant emergency authorisation as the UK did, that was down to member states. Stephen Donnelly said back in December this wasn't the case and that they had to work in tandem with our EU neighbours.

Had we gone ahead on our own steam and emergency authorised the Astra Zeneca vaccine then we'd be in a far better place now - would have saved a lot of lives. If this isn't an emergency then what is ????
Meanwhile Germany did a side deal for 30 million extra doses of the Pfizer vaccine - crickets from the Commission.

They also ordered 200,000 "Trump antibodies" from Regeneron in another side deal - again crickets from the Commission.

We're all in this together my ass.

Pfizer announce delay in production - "that's grand lads, it happens to the best of us" from the Commission.
Astra Zeneca announce the same - and remember the EMA HASN'T EVEN APPROVED the AZ vaccine yet - HOW DARE YOU BREACH CONTRACT !!!!! And by the way, they probably didn't breach contract.

And as for the cost:
Pfizer: $20 per dose.
Moderna: $10 to $50 per dose.
AstraZeneca: under $4 per dose.

Had we gone with Astra Zeneca emergency approval, we'd be up there with the UK and Israel, and have a much lower cost. Remind me again how the EMA and the EU have helped here exactly?

When did they submit their data to the EMA?

The EU will grant approval when they have the necessary phase-IV data.

So, you are sure that the only thing holding back the vaccination programme is lack of approval? I mean, otherwise the company has copious supplies of the vaccine to give? And the only breach of contract is the lack of approval? The Belgian lab’s deficiency is fake news?

Whether or not people like the EU, we form one of the biggest markets in the world, and probably most attractive. Good luck to Astra peeving off their European customers

Pete_Cavan · 27-01-2021 02:26PM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Had we gone with Astra Zeneca emergency approval, we'd be up there with the UK and Israel, and have a much lower cost. Remind me again how the EMA and the EU have helped here exactly?

How would emergency approval have avoided the current production issues? If that is the case, then it implies that AZ are holding back or diverting EU supply.

Do you need to be reminded of the several hundred million euros paid up front by the EU?

froog · 27-01-2021 02:28PM

okay this is getting ridiculous now.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2021/jan/27/coronavirus-live-news-uk-to-quarantine-arrivals-from-high-risk-countries-as-global-covid-cases-pass-100m

6m ago
14:21
The police have confirmed reports by the BBC that a bomb disposal unit has been dispatched to a factory in Wales that produces AstraZeneca’s Covid-19 vaccine, Reuters reports.

“Upon expert advice we have partially evacuated the site pending a full investigation. The safety of our employees and business continuity remain of paramount importance,” the company that runs the factory, Wockhardt UK, said.

Local police confirmed that a bomb disposal unit was on site and advised the public to avoid the area.

monkeybutter · 27-01-2021 02:30PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLo7G0ERu1I

27-01-2021 02:31PM

Evan Rich Storefront wrote: »

When did they submit their dats to the EMA?

The EU will grant approval when they have the necessary phase-IV data.

So, you are sure that the only thing holding back the vaccination programme is lack of approval? I mean, otherwise the company has copious supplies of the vaccine to give? And the only breach of contract is the lack of approval? The Belgian lab’s deficiency is fake news?

We don't know why they took so long to submit for approval - at least I'm not aware of the reason. Also we could have emergency approved this back in December like the UK did.

I never said that they have copious supplies - they obviously don't or they would just supply them. It's most likely because they have the UK, Israel etc who approved it ahead of the EU and rolled it out more rapidly than projected, coupled with possibly them paying a premium for it, that has led to supply constraints.

Realistically the AZ vaccine is by far and away the best vaccine we have at the moment logistically and cost wise to get us out of this mess.

9db3xj7z41fs5u · 27-01-2021 02:33PM

monkeybutter wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLo7G0ERu1I

Your argument will be redundant when the EU approves the Astra’s vaccine by the end of the week. Will the vaccine flood in with the approval? Or will no vaccine arrive and it will still be the EU’s fault?

27-01-2021 02:36PM

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

How would emergency approval have avoided the current production issues? If that is the case, then it implies that AZ are holding back or diverting EU supply.

AZ would have had to share out the supply they had, rather than supply the customers who were ready to go as it seems they sensibly did.

You're in business : Customer A says your quote is approved, here's your money, give us your products ASAP. Customer B says we'll get back to you in 2 months and let you know whether we are going to buy anything from you, and by the way, keep all your stock for us. Who do you supply?

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

Do you need to be reminded of the several hundred million euros paid up front by the EU?

As a Cavan man, did you ever pay up front for anything? If not, why not?

Donald Trump · 27-01-2021 02:36PM

Deleted User wrote: »

We don't know why they took so long to submit for approval - at least I'm not aware of the reason. Also we could have emergency approved this back in December like the UK did.

I never said that they have copious supplies - they obviously don't or they would just supply them. It's most likely because they have the UK, Israel etc who approved it ahead of the EU and rolled it out more rapidly than projected, coupled with possibly them paying a premium for it, that has led to supply constraints.

Realistically the AZ vaccine is by far and away the best vaccine we have at the moment logistically and cost wise to get us out of this mess.

Ah sure why stop at emergency approval?

Why not just open it up so that each individual can buy a "vaccine" off whomever they like once the seller "pinky-promises" that it'll work with no side effects?

There'd probably be a good few sellers on ebay within hours if they did that.

What exactly is happening with AstraZeneca?

Comments