Coronavirus: COVID-19

[RegisterMe]

Good post Alan.

[X2-Illuminatus]

EMA recommends COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca for authorisation in the EU. Now it's up to the European Commission to give the final 'go'.

Meanwhile, the European Commission has put a transparency and authorisation mechanism for exports of COVID-19 vaccines into place.

[Alan Phipps]

Greater transparency and authorisation is always a great principle to adhere to. Let's hope that it does not also add to vaccine deployment bureaucracy and delay. <fingers crossed>

One other aspect that somewhat mystifies and concerns me is that the political wrangling to date has quite adversely affected the share prices of some of the currently operating vaccine manufacturers. (Who would have thought such a thing possible during a global pandemic?) Anyway, I fear that this might potentially affect the ability of those manufacturers to obtain full capital and corporate credit for further expansion, research, optimisation, and their assistance efforts to Third World countries. I hope that this does not actually happen as it would not be a great diplomatic legacy for the politicians involved in bringing it about (not to mention the lives potentially affected).

[Gavrushka]

Article 16 invoked, which I believe essentially puts a hard border between Northern Ireland and the EU, over movement of vaccines.

Please, will somebody confirm that the UK government had no influence on AstraZeneca's decision to limit supplies of their vaccine to the EU for the next few weeks.

Gotta say I'm shocked and more than a little confused.

*edit*

Link to breaking news story.

[Alan Phipps]

The press and media coverage from differing points of view and allegiances is so partisan that whatever you see or read about UK government involvement in the issue will be disputed by other parties.

The silly thing (if true) is that apart from a firm statement made by Michael Gove to the contrary, I believe that AZ initially offered 8M extra doses (from UK production but not already committed to the UK contract) to the EU and that negotiations for a transfer from UK production and delivery allocation (quantity unknown) were rumoured as being explored in principle. I guess that after the sabre-rattling, all Government bets are off for now.

[Chips]

I love the idea it's to stop potential vaccine exports to the UK to ensure they're not fulfilling the UK order partially from the EU instead of the EU order... while demanding that the contract should be honoured and supplies produced in the UK exported to the EU (meaning the UK's or other nations contracts aren't fulfilled).

Surely the EU has dozens of sites that can manufacture vaccines across the 27 nations. Surely the UK has other suitable sites too. Instead of arguing (which doesn't address the actual problem), it should be a call to arms of everywhere that *can* produce among the 27 nations and share the technique/license whatever is required. The current action being taken is not going to change anything - no-one's going to get the required doses magically out of thing air. There's *STILL* going to be a shortfall - just shared (unequally?).

Are they looking at how to address the problem, as right now politicians first response seems to be shout, blockade, start legal action. That's their best efforts or have I missed something somewhere... I

Solve the damned problem, not create yet more problems (maybe they are it just isn't reported in the places I've read?).

[Tamina]

There's *STILL* going to be a shortfall - just shared (unequally?).

As it is normally and expected from a contractor on the free market.

Someone delivers parts to two manufacturers, both are competitors to each other. Tesla and Mercedes. There are production problems, and the manufacturer distributes his/her wares unequally to Mercedes, while halting Teslas production to 40%, practically intervening in the market. I am not sure if this is illegal or just bad behaviour but I don't remember having seen someone doing that ever.

[felter]

All I can say about what is going on, is that every single one of them should be ashamed of themselves, not just these so called leaders but the press as well for fuelling the fire. The UK does not need all of the vaccines, the UK population is under 70 million and only a fraction of that numner is at a high risk from the virus. The UK does not need over 500,000,000 doses of vaccine. We are talking about saving lives here, a lot of lives at that, just because they do not stay where you does not not mean their lives do not matter, because they do. The virus doesn't stop at borders and neither should the distribution of a vaccine against that virus. All that matters right now is that we fight this threat together, as one world not as single nations. These people are nothing but an embarrassment, that don't deserve to be in the positions that they are in.

[Gavrushka]

I'm not sure the EU needs 2 billion doses either, or Canada needs 10 doses per capita.

Thing is, countries *had* to back multiple vaccine CANDIDATES as they didn't know which would end up successful.

And what I'm truly ashamed of is the vast number of people who pass news through their own prejudice filter, selecting a meaning and a guilty party based on their partisan beliefs.

It seems the truth really has become what we need it to be.

Christ, we really are a vile species, aren't we?

[Mightysword]

one thing to think about is we still don't know (or do we now?) for how long the vaccine will give immunity for. I doubt the amount stated so far is what a countries will need at one time, because even if they do there is no mean to give that many out at once. But, it could be a long run strategy. What if a vaccine only protect a person for 6 months? In the US, we're going through Phase 1 and 1.5 of what probably gonna be a 4-5 phases process. Given the current speed, by the time we finish phase 5, the people who got vaccines at phase 1 will have to take theirs again for round 2. If the plan is to fully suppress the virus in the long run, countries will have to ensure their population have continuous immunity for maybe 2-3 years.

It's easier to point finger and vilify when we're not the one who have to make the hard decision, and chivalrous acts is always harder to do than merely speaking chivalrous words, at the end of the day it's not abnormal for leadership to prioritize their own people. I'm not gonna cheering them on as doing the right thing, but I don't feel I can criticize them at making selfish decision either. I'm just glad I'm not in a position where I need to weight one life over another.

I don't believe this is something that can be solved my moral/ethical grand standing or virtue signaling, it's purely a supply and demand issue that can only be solved by ramping up supply to a point everyone can get theirs. And if the vaccine turn out they can give longer immunity (1year+) that will certainly help as well.

[Gavrushka]

Captain Sir Tom Moore, who's been poorly with pneumonia for some weeks, has just been admitted to hospital with Covid-19. (For those outside the UK, he turned 100 last year, and was knighted after raising 40 million for the NHS by walking up and down in his garden using his rollator.)

Anyhow, I don't think there'll be a dissenting voice when I say I wish him well.

What a guy.

[CBJ]

This article about the correlation between a country's culture, specifically its attitude towards following rules, seems interesting. It describes some analysis that confirms what many of us will have expected, namely that one of the reasons that some countries have had fewer deaths per capita than others, is that they are culturally more willing to accept rules. It also describes some of the ways in which governments' messaging has affected the outcome in countries where people are less willing to toe the line; the differences between countries with good and bad messaging are stark.

[Alan Phipps]

Apparently a British national returning from Johannesburg South Africa by plane made it through Heathrow arrivals very quickly without having their Covid testing and planned location details checked there and despite the current concern about further SA strain cases arriving in the UK.

Now you would think that the correct reaction of a 'concerned' passenger would be to make a fuss about it at Heathrow where something could quickly be done about it right there and then. No, she travelled home first and then contacted the press. She is now said to be self-isolating - despite the the press photos likely taken since and outside, possibly somewhere public.

She would not have even been allowed on the plane in SA without the correct Covid documentation to fly to the UK and so was a small Covid risk anyway, but that is surely not the point.

[RegisterMe]

No, she travelled home first and then contacted the press.

I believe she's a journalist?

[Alan Phipps]

That makes it even more incredible. She cannot say that she didn't understand the implications of her actions or inactions.

[BrasatoAlBarolo]

So she risked the infection of others just to make a point about insufficient checks at the airport, didn't she?

[Alan Phipps]

No I don't think she risked much in the way of Covid transmission from herself as she had the proper documentation anyway. It is more that she would rather delay notifying it and then make the headlines in the papers and on TV, than actually get Heathrow officials to do their job properly starting right from when the problem was first noticed. I suspect it's about personal gain and publicity versus 'doing the right/best thing' in the interests of the nation. In hindsight, she probably could have done both anyway.

[Tamina]

Realistically, what are the odds they would've actually changed something? Don't waste your time trying to argue with officials, they don't do their job anyway.

[Mightysword]

So she risked the infection of others just to make a point about insufficient checks at the airport, didn't she?

If she's not doing this for personal publicity, it can be she simply think this kind of publicity is needed to actually get something fixed. It's like trying to call customer service for something and have your issues ignore/delay forever, but blow it up in the media and the company can't rush to "offer" solution fast enough.

[Alan Phipps]

There's a great leverage in "Hey, I'm a journalist and I want to know why you aren't doing what the government has told you to do." It makes things move and get fixed pretty quickly in most cases.

Doing it all later just smacks of personal gain.