Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman
Is the "science" not that they have (or at least were due) more of the Pfizer vaccine and we do not?
All things being equal based on the data available there'd be no reason to risk the AZ vaccine on groups it hadn't been tested on when you could offer them Pfizer, concentrating AZ on groups it had been tested on.
As it stands both suppliers let the EU down, but that doesn't make it an unsound judgement based on the circumstances. Despite the emergency the United States haven't approved the AZ vaccine at all. South Africa have handed theirs to neighbouring countries instead of distributing them. It seems somewhat bizarre that the UK are seeking vindication for their own decisions from the EU of all people.
|
Correct - given that they were likely to have had a bigger supply of the Pfizer vaccine they could afford to restrict the use of AstraZeneca. As a simple logistical measure it makes sense.
Of course, they may also have thought it was politically helpful to be able to talk down the British vaccine thereby enhancing the status of the German one. There is no doubt the EU’s procurement shortcomings reflect poorly on member states who supported it - especially those that abandoned their own promising procurement programmes in order to take part.
Whatever’s the case, they failed to calculate was the lasting damage they were doing to the reputation of the AstraZeneca vaccine and how this would start to compromise their vaccination programme among younger adults who would still be offered it. This is what senior experts in Germany are now starting to acknowledge.