9 ms·

EU blocks export of AstraZeneca Covid-19 vaccines to Australia

41 points by the-dude 6y ago

bitcharmer 6y ago
So much for EU's principles of non-discrimination and free trade. Also, IIRC they said AstraZeneca vaccine is not very effective. I honestly don't blame AZ for not wanting to deal with EU bureaucrats.
- hrktb 6y ago
  AstraZeneca failed to fulfill their contract with Italy to then request an external shipment outside of it. That doesn’t seem to have anything with free-trade or non-discrimination, and more contract enforcement.
  - jariel 6y ago
    No, this is not true. The EU has no regular authority to 'enforce' contracts in such a matter, how any company decides to delivery is up to that company. If Italy wants to sue or sue for damages, it can try do to that. For example, if this were procurement of some kind of automobile, Italy would not be in a position to 'ban' shipments outside of the EU. This is happening because: 1) 'Emergency Powers' 2) EU's failure to acquire vaccines through normal operations. 3) Optics and populism. Every politician in the world is sweating right now. Otherwise, the issue would have be taken up on court.
- mns 6y ago
  > So much for EU's principles of non-discrimination and free trade. I think those things apply (or are prioritised) within the block. > IIRC they said AstraZeneca vaccine is not very effective. Do you have a source on that? The vaccine was not certified in certain countries for certain age groups.
  - the-dude 6y ago
    A much quoted figure is that the AZ vaccine is 'only' 60% effective compared to 90%+ for Pfizer et al. However, this 60% number is for totally preventing a COVID infection. The AZ vaccine is just as much, or even more effective at preventing severe illness / hospitalization. I do blame the EU commission for the general narrative about the AZ vaccine, as it has negative consequences directly with the public : in NL ( and in DE as well if I am not mistaken ), there are people who don't want the AZ vaccine because of this. So I do blame the EU commission on endangering the general public health of its constituents.
    - jamesrr39 6y ago
      > So I do blame the EU commission on endangering the general public health of its constituents. As the comment you replied to asked; do you have an actual source for that? The "much quoted" thing is not a source, it is simply weasel words. For what it's worth, some national-level politicians have said some negative comments about it, but I can't recall hearing any EU commission figures commenting negatively about it (being cautious about it; sure, but negative, I can't recall any). Happy to be proved wrong though.
      - the-dude 6y ago
        > it is simply weasel words. That is not very nice to say. !g astrazeneca 60% effective site:.eu : First hit : https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/news/ema-recommends-covid-19-vaccine-astrazeneca-authorisation-eu https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/news/ema-recommends-covid-19-va... Please note I blame them for the general narrative around AZ as being not trustworthy. It is very clear to see in comments from the Dutch public ( and I have seen similar sentiments at our DE neighbors ). It does not help our press is not very critical, I'll give you that.
        jamesrr39 6y ago
        Sorry, I didn't mean to be offensive with the "weasel words" comment, simply that is the term for this kind of "much quoted figure" kind of text (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weasel_word https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weasel_word). Thanks for providing a link to the EMA press release though. On the note of that press release, the title of the page is "EMA recommends COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca for authorisation in the EU", which I wouldn't consider anti-AZ, and reading the text it states in the same paragraph that it's talking about "reduction in the number of symptomatic COVID-19 cases in people given the vaccine". Anyway, I didn't mean to offend, just calling out what I saw, others may have a different opinion to me of course.
- neals 6y ago
  Your comment should be in some sort of psychology textbook or something. I'm just astonished by almost every word of it. It truly is a work of art...
  - the-dude 6y ago
    Your comment is totally void of substance.
- edoloughlin 6y ago
  So much for EU's principles of non-discrimination and free trade. There is non-discrimination and free trade within the EU. Australia isn’t a member of the EU.
- kasperni 6y ago
  Yes, the USA really set a bad example for the rest of the world by invoking the Defense Production Act last year, and Biden renewing it last month. Or did you think the EU is the only one playing these games?
  - prague60 6y ago
    The USA had this position from the outset, everyone was able to plan around it. I don't think it was the best position, but I think there is value in making its position clear. This move by the EU just shows Van der Leyen's floundering and the EU showing again the limits of its efficacy as a governing organization.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
jariel 6y ago
It doesn't matter how much legitimacy Italy/EU might have, this is just going to have very bad optics overall. A few wins for the local nationalists i.e. 'our people first' ... but it comes with just as much of a downside. Better just to get the vaccines moving.
- fwsgonzo 6y ago
  What's the downside? I don't have a clue about these things.
  - jariel 6y ago
    It looks incredibly bad for nations to be playing 'vaccine nationalism' and banning exports of anything, especially life medicine, to other nations. It looks possibly very petty and incompetent. The vaccine maker will claim that their commercial obligations are to Australia, the EU is literally overriding commercial deals for nationalist reasons, very bad, and exposes their own failure to negotiate a good deal, especially on home turf. The only upside is the PR to some local citizens who want to feel that 'The EU is doing their job protecting us'. Successful nations are not resorting to this. The EU is way behind and it's a really look. The UK is 33% vaccinated and is going to fully open up in a few months, once they are full-blown open, then the clock is ticking on Von Der Leyen's job and the credibility of the EU because every day that goes by while US/UK are full steam ahead is a slap in the face. If the EU is 6 months behind fully opening up then the consequences - were there actually any way for EU citizens to do anything about it - would be severe. Since the EU political system is shielded from populism like 'elections' and certainly 'referendums' they're probably safe. I suggest the elites will band together and put all the blame on Von Der Leyen. But it may not come to that, production is ramping up it may not be so bad. This is the biggest crisis of our era so the headline optics are really important, and the underlying materiality of lock-downs are felt by every citizen in the country. Imagine 60 million people under duress, looking next door, seeing how everything is open and happy? That's a political nightmare. The vaccination data is here [1] At the current rate, UK is open in a few months, US a bit thereafter. EU won't be able to open for technically 2 years (!!) so it's going to really depend on how vaccinations ramp up. Every politician is sweating. [1] https://ourworldindata.org/covid-vaccinations https://ourworldindata.org/covid-vaccinations Edit: I should add, Italy blocking shipments to Australia is a completely different kind of communication than for example Trump, saying, earlier in the pandemic that he would 'prioritize Americans'. The later is a tough, but reasonable sounding policy. But actively blocking shipments especially when agreements have been made - it's bad. Honestly, if it were a remotely 'poorer country' like Brazil or whatever ... it would be even worse. It's just bad however you cut it. The headline you want is 'we'll be done by August' etc..
AnotherGoodName 6y ago
The one good thing here is that Australia doesn't have any COVID outside of quarantine facilities. Europe is in far more need than Australia so it's probably for the best. I say this as an Australian citizen. It would be nice if the EU got their house in order though so that they didn't have to steal vaccines to keep people alive.
- 0xfaded 6y ago
  Think of the de-risking achieved by vaccinating the people working in the quarantine hotels. Those 2500 vaccines would provide much higher value in Australia than saving face for some of the most incompetent politicians on the planet.
- pgeorgi 6y ago
  Hard to keep people alive when you have vaccine producers that don't deliver on their contracts yet ship out the very same stuff to other customers. Not that you'd need it, as apparently Australia will be able to produce its own AZ vaccine by end of March, but ask AZ to ship batches made in the UK or US to Australia and see how well that goes: at least the EU is allowing exports as long as it's not singularly expected to bear the impact of production issues.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- 0xy 6y ago
  Australia's economy, and in particular Victoria's, was shattered by the longest and strictest lockdown globally. It's nice if you got to keep your job, but many businesses and lives were destroyed. Especially blue collar businesses. The government offered the businesses that it literally forced out of business essentially zero compensation. Are we supposed to be perpetually in and out of lockdowns for years until the rest of the world is vaccinated? Economic downturn is directly linked to adverse health outcomes, not just including suicide but things like deferred treatments, depression and otherwise.
jonplackett 6y ago
This would be more understandable if it wasn’t for the reports of AZ vaccine piling up and not being used in the EU
- kyriakos 6y ago
  Some countries in EU use them just fine, only some set restrictions on ages
  - jonplackett 6y ago
    It’s not just the age restriction, Macron’s been bad mouthing it and saying it barely works so now no-one wants it.
    - kyriakos 6y ago
      Germany announced today that its ok to use for over 65s as well. So the trend is changing and was definitely not just Macron
niccoloramponi 6y ago
Quite right! If the agreements with the EU have not been respected!
- turbodami 6y ago
  What agreements are you talking about?
  - jnurmine 6y ago
    Probably this: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_21_302 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_21_...
tibiahurried 6y ago
Once more, this simply shows how weak EU is and how much it depends on the USA for survival: defense, science, tech. The entire EU was only able to produce one vaccine: also UK is not in EU anymore, and AstraZeneca is a British-Swedish. It does not come as a surprise. In decades, they haven't invested any significant money in research and tech, but austerity. Thousands of EU engineers and scientists moved to the USA to never come back. EU is now paying an high price. And given their inability to reverse this trend, they will always be at the mercy of other more developed and advanced countries.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- bart_spoon 6y ago
  Technically, the Pfizer vaccine is a collaboration between Pfizer, and BioNTech, a German company. I believe much of the development was done by BioNTech, with Pfizer doing much of the production and distribution. So while it isn't solely an EU effort, they were crucial in it's development.
  - totalZero 6y ago
    This is a good point, and Pfizer's vaccine isn't the only example. Janssen, the JnJ subsidiary, is headquartered in Belgium. All of these companies have researchers who hail from and work in other countries... None of the major vaccines would have been possible without international cooperation for sequencing, development, and testing....and the virus doesn't check your passport before it enters your cells. Ultimately issues like competing contractual obligations can get ugly, fast. But aggressive vaccine nationalism can impede the kind of international collaboration that is necessary to produce enough product to inoculate everyone who wants a shot.
    - pgeorgi 6y ago
      > Ultimately issues like competing contractual obligations can get ugly, fast. But aggressive vaccine nationalism can impede the kind of international collaboration that is necessary to produce enough product to inoculate everyone who wants a shot. Normally vaccine exports are no problem for the EU, originally there wasn't even the mechanism that is now used to block that one shipment. Given all the circumstances (various vaccine exports still going on, Australia having a pretty calm Covid situation right now and starting production of their own AZ vaccine this month) I wonder if that shipment was deliberately chosen as a statement to get AZ to stop playing games while minimizing the impact it has on global efforts. (or maybe I'm giving bureaucrats too much credit) Of course a heads-up notice to Australia would have been nice if that was the case.
Stannary 6y ago
EU used its negotiating power to drive the price of covid vaccine down, and now producers are ignoring "low profit" EU contracts and selling vaccines to highest bidder.
- s1artibartfast 6y ago
  Do we actually know how the price the Australian gov negotiated compares?
- StavrosK 6y ago
  And for $1/dose, as if I want to save $2 instead of getting two doses more quickly... What the hell were they thinking?
- pityJuke 6y ago
  AZ is required by its contract with Oxford to sell at no profit during the pandemic period [1]. "A key element of Oxford’s partnership with AstraZeneca is the joint commitment to provide the vaccine on a not-for-profit basis for the duration of the pandemic across the world, and in perpetuity to low- and middle-income countries." [1]: https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2020-11-23-oxford-university-breakthrough-global-covid-19-vaccine https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2020-11-23-oxford-university-break...
- mrtksn 6y ago
  I wonder if there is push for this narrative with throwaway accounts? This was discussed many times, If I remember correctly the negotiatons were not on the price but on the liability issues etc. I mean, AZ says its selling at no-profit. Did EU made them to sell at loss then? What's the logic of this narrative?
  - Stannary 6y ago
    https://observer.com/2020/11/covid19-vaccine-price-pfizer-moderna-astrazeneca-oxford/ https://observer.com/2020/11/covid19-vaccine-price-pfizer-mo... On Monday, AstraZeneca said it will provide vaccines at cost “in perpetuity” to low- and middle-income countries in the developing world. Do any of the Australia or EU belong to "low- and middle-income countries in the developing world"
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
raverbashing 6y ago
AZ missed several weekly deliveries to the EU recently, and was cutting shipment quantities. The fact that they were trying to export doesn't bode well to them pretending they're following "best effort" wording on the contract. Follow the contracts and you don't get your shipments blocked. Pfizer exports from Europe to Canada no problem. If this was the US or any other country I believe most of the comments would be positive.
- jariel 6y ago
  "Follow the contracts and you don't get your shipments blocked." This does not make any sense, it's worse than crude economic nationalism because it doesn't take other agreements into context. They were probably 'following the contracts' - but by the nature of the agreements - at least some shipments to go Australia. "The fact that they were trying to export doesn't bode well to them pretending they're following "best effort" wording on the contract." No - this is false. Everyone is behind on manufacturing - that we all accept. This means that shipments everywhere are going to be delayed. If they are late overall, then of course some shipments are going to go to other customers, while some shipments go to Italy. Your statement basically implies: "I don't care what your contracts are - Italy comes before all the other customers, if you don't ship to us, we are going to use emergency measures to screw you and your other customers". You're not saying: "respect the contract" You're saying: "respect our contract, we don't give a crap about anyone else's contract, because we have the power of the law to screw them" "If this was the US or any other country I believe most of the comments would be positive. " No, the news would roughly be the same: a nation screwed up in it's procurement, months behind other nations, is screwing up agreed deliveries to other nations because of a procurement failure. The EU's attempts to 'work together' to secure vaccines has been a big boondoggle, this is obvious.
  - pgeorgi 6y ago
    > They were probably 'following the contracts' - but by the nature of the agreements - at least some shipments to go Australia There has been a shipment to Australia before: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-02-28/astrazeneca-oxford-vaccine-doses-arrive-in-australia/13201032 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-02-28/astrazeneca-oxford-va...
ArtemZ 6y ago
I'll get Sputnik V vaccine next week (I live in Russia). I wish there were less politics involved so everyone who needs it could get the vaccine without worrying that Putin's regime is behind it.
jamesrr39 6y ago
This is the second 'EU blocks export of AstraZeneca vaccine' headline (the other being the UK). It's interesting how the EU ends up carrying the backlash on both occasions, and AstraZeneca, who are the ones who ultimately over-committed and under-delivered, still comes out of it with relatively little PR damage.
- prague60 6y ago
  Isn't this because the EU let the US/UK take priority of production? I was under the impression AZ was filling their fulfillments to US/UK just fine. This seems like EU just couldn't keep up in the horse race negotiating.
  - IfOnlyYouKnew 6y ago
    This is still the subject of debate, and, at some point, possibly a matter for the courts. What has emerged more recently is that the UK contract was, in contradiction of earlier statements, signed a day after the EU contract. The UK contract's text was also leaked somewhat accidentally, and it is almost identical to the previously-released EU contract. I've looked at them side-by-side and I'm just not enough of an armchair lawyer to make too much sense of 60-page contracts, but I couldn't quite see how the existing differences would constitute any clear priority for the UK.
    - tester89 6y ago
      Citations! I need to see this.
    - decodebytes 6y ago
      > signed a day after the EU contract. I have been following this quite closely, and this is complete new to me. I would really like to see a source on this, otherwise it should be considered false information.
      - IfOnlyYouKnew 6y ago
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
jeeeb 6y ago
As an Australian I actually don’t have much of a problem with this. I didn’t see it mentioned in the article but of the total of 53.4 million doses of AZ vaccine Australia has ordered 50 million are being manufactured in Australia. What’s more except for some minor outbreaks originating from returned traveller quarantine community transmission has been effectively stopped in Australia for the last 6 months. Even 1 case outside of returned traveller quarantine is big news and cause for internal travel restrictions. It’s been months since the last person died from COVID-19 and the economy has largely recovered to prepandemic GDP levels. Frankly this is a minor delay in Australia’s vaccine rollout and the doses will go to serving places that are frankly more in need.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]

41 points by the-dude 6y ago

So much for EU's principles of non-discrimination and free trade. Also, IIRC they said AstraZeneca vaccine is not very effective. I honestly don't blame AZ for not wanting to deal with EU bureaucrats.

hrktb 6y ago
AstraZeneca failed to fulfill their contract with Italy to then request an external shipment outside of it. That doesn’t seem to have anything with free-trade or non-discrimination, and more contract enforcement.
- jariel 6y ago
  No, this is not true. The EU has no regular authority to 'enforce' contracts in such a matter, how any company decides to delivery is up to that company. If Italy wants to sue or sue for damages, it can try do to that. For example, if this were procurement of some kind of automobile, Italy would not be in a position to 'ban' shipments outside of the EU. This is happening because: 1) 'Emergency Powers' 2) EU's failure to acquire vaccines through normal operations. 3) Optics and populism. Every politician in the world is sweating right now. Otherwise, the issue would have be taken up on court.
mns 6y ago
> So much for EU's principles of non-discrimination and free trade. I think those things apply (or are prioritised) within the block. > IIRC they said AstraZeneca vaccine is not very effective. Do you have a source on that? The vaccine was not certified in certain countries for certain age groups.
- the-dude 6y ago
  A much quoted figure is that the AZ vaccine is 'only' 60% effective compared to 90%+ for Pfizer et al. However, this 60% number is for totally preventing a COVID infection. The AZ vaccine is just as much, or even more effective at preventing severe illness / hospitalization. I do blame the EU commission for the general narrative about the AZ vaccine, as it has negative consequences directly with the public : in NL ( and in DE as well if I am not mistaken ), there are people who don't want the AZ vaccine because of this. So I do blame the EU commission on endangering the general public health of its constituents.
  - jamesrr39 6y ago
    > So I do blame the EU commission on endangering the general public health of its constituents. As the comment you replied to asked; do you have an actual source for that? The "much quoted" thing is not a source, it is simply weasel words. For what it's worth, some national-level politicians have said some negative comments about it, but I can't recall hearing any EU commission figures commenting negatively about it (being cautious about it; sure, but negative, I can't recall any). Happy to be proved wrong though.
    - the-dude 6y ago
      > it is simply weasel words. That is not very nice to say. !g astrazeneca 60% effective site:.eu : First hit : https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/news/ema-recommends-covid-19-vaccine-astrazeneca-authorisation-eu https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/news/ema-recommends-covid-19-va... Please note I blame them for the general narrative around AZ as being not trustworthy. It is very clear to see in comments from the Dutch public ( and I have seen similar sentiments at our DE neighbors ). It does not help our press is not very critical, I'll give you that.
      - jamesrr39 6y ago
        Sorry, I didn't mean to be offensive with the "weasel words" comment, simply that is the term for this kind of "much quoted figure" kind of text (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weasel_word https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weasel_word). Thanks for providing a link to the EMA press release though. On the note of that press release, the title of the page is "EMA recommends COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca for authorisation in the EU", which I wouldn't consider anti-AZ, and reading the text it states in the same paragraph that it's talking about "reduction in the number of symptomatic COVID-19 cases in people given the vaccine". Anyway, I didn't mean to offend, just calling out what I saw, others may have a different opinion to me of course.
neals 6y ago
Your comment should be in some sort of psychology textbook or something. I'm just astonished by almost every word of it. It truly is a work of art...
- the-dude 6y ago
  Your comment is totally void of substance.
edoloughlin 6y ago
So much for EU's principles of non-discrimination and free trade. There is non-discrimination and free trade within the EU. Australia isn’t a member of the EU.
kasperni 6y ago
Yes, the USA really set a bad example for the rest of the world by invoking the Defense Production Act last year, and Biden renewing it last month. Or did you think the EU is the only one playing these games?
- prague60 6y ago
  The USA had this position from the outset, everyone was able to plan around it. I don't think it was the best position, but I think there is value in making its position clear. This move by the EU just shows Van der Leyen's floundering and the EU showing again the limits of its efficacy as a governing organization.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

jariel 6y ago

It doesn't matter how much legitimacy Italy/EU might have, this is just going to have very bad optics overall. A few wins for the local nationalists i.e. 'our people first' ... but it comes with just as much of a downside. Better just to get the vaccines moving.

fwsgonzo 6y ago
What's the downside? I don't have a clue about these things.
- jariel 6y ago
  It looks incredibly bad for nations to be playing 'vaccine nationalism' and banning exports of anything, especially life medicine, to other nations. It looks possibly very petty and incompetent. The vaccine maker will claim that their commercial obligations are to Australia, the EU is literally overriding commercial deals for nationalist reasons, very bad, and exposes their own failure to negotiate a good deal, especially on home turf. The only upside is the PR to some local citizens who want to feel that 'The EU is doing their job protecting us'. Successful nations are not resorting to this. The EU is way behind and it's a really look. The UK is 33% vaccinated and is going to fully open up in a few months, once they are full-blown open, then the clock is ticking on Von Der Leyen's job and the credibility of the EU because every day that goes by while US/UK are full steam ahead is a slap in the face. If the EU is 6 months behind fully opening up then the consequences - were there actually any way for EU citizens to do anything about it - would be severe. Since the EU political system is shielded from populism like 'elections' and certainly 'referendums' they're probably safe. I suggest the elites will band together and put all the blame on Von Der Leyen. But it may not come to that, production is ramping up it may not be so bad. This is the biggest crisis of our era so the headline optics are really important, and the underlying materiality of lock-downs are felt by every citizen in the country. Imagine 60 million people under duress, looking next door, seeing how everything is open and happy? That's a political nightmare. The vaccination data is here [1] At the current rate, UK is open in a few months, US a bit thereafter. EU won't be able to open for technically 2 years (!!) so it's going to really depend on how vaccinations ramp up. Every politician is sweating. [1] https://ourworldindata.org/covid-vaccinations https://ourworldindata.org/covid-vaccinations Edit: I should add, Italy blocking shipments to Australia is a completely different kind of communication than for example Trump, saying, earlier in the pandemic that he would 'prioritize Americans'. The later is a tough, but reasonable sounding policy. But actively blocking shipments especially when agreements have been made - it's bad. Honestly, if it were a remotely 'poorer country' like Brazil or whatever ... it would be even worse. It's just bad however you cut it. The headline you want is 'we'll be done by August' etc..

AnotherGoodName 6y ago

The one good thing here is that Australia doesn't have any COVID outside of quarantine facilities. Europe is in far more need than Australia so it's probably for the best. I say this as an Australian citizen. It would be nice if the EU got their house in order though so that they didn't have to steal vaccines to keep people alive.

0xfaded 6y ago
Think of the de-risking achieved by vaccinating the people working in the quarantine hotels. Those 2500 vaccines would provide much higher value in Australia than saving face for some of the most incompetent politicians on the planet.
pgeorgi 6y ago
Hard to keep people alive when you have vaccine producers that don't deliver on their contracts yet ship out the very same stuff to other customers. Not that you'd need it, as apparently Australia will be able to produce its own AZ vaccine by end of March, but ask AZ to ship batches made in the UK or US to Australia and see how well that goes: at least the EU is allowing exports as long as it's not singularly expected to bear the impact of production issues.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
0xy 6y ago
Australia's economy, and in particular Victoria's, was shattered by the longest and strictest lockdown globally. It's nice if you got to keep your job, but many businesses and lives were destroyed. Especially blue collar businesses. The government offered the businesses that it literally forced out of business essentially zero compensation. Are we supposed to be perpetually in and out of lockdowns for years until the rest of the world is vaccinated? Economic downturn is directly linked to adverse health outcomes, not just including suicide but things like deferred treatments, depression and otherwise.

jonplackett 6y ago

This would be more understandable if it wasn’t for the reports of AZ vaccine piling up and not being used in the EU

kyriakos 6y ago
Some countries in EU use them just fine, only some set restrictions on ages
- jonplackett 6y ago
  It’s not just the age restriction, Macron’s been bad mouthing it and saying it barely works so now no-one wants it.
  - kyriakos 6y ago
    Germany announced today that its ok to use for over 65s as well. So the trend is changing and was definitely not just Macron

niccoloramponi 6y ago

Quite right! If the agreements with the EU have not been respected!

turbodami 6y ago
What agreements are you talking about?
- jnurmine 6y ago
  Probably this: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_21_302 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_21_...

tibiahurried 6y ago

Once more, this simply shows how weak EU is and how much it depends on the USA for survival: defense, science, tech. The entire EU was only able to produce one vaccine: also UK is not in EU anymore, and AstraZeneca is a British-Swedish. It does not come as a surprise. In decades, they haven't invested any significant money in research and tech, but austerity. Thousands of EU engineers and scientists moved to the USA to never come back. EU is now paying an high price. And given their inability to reverse this trend, they will always be at the mercy of other more developed and advanced countries.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
bart_spoon 6y ago
Technically, the Pfizer vaccine is a collaboration between Pfizer, and BioNTech, a German company. I believe much of the development was done by BioNTech, with Pfizer doing much of the production and distribution. So while it isn't solely an EU effort, they were crucial in it's development.
- totalZero 6y ago
  This is a good point, and Pfizer's vaccine isn't the only example. Janssen, the JnJ subsidiary, is headquartered in Belgium. All of these companies have researchers who hail from and work in other countries... None of the major vaccines would have been possible without international cooperation for sequencing, development, and testing....and the virus doesn't check your passport before it enters your cells. Ultimately issues like competing contractual obligations can get ugly, fast. But aggressive vaccine nationalism can impede the kind of international collaboration that is necessary to produce enough product to inoculate everyone who wants a shot.
  - pgeorgi 6y ago
    > Ultimately issues like competing contractual obligations can get ugly, fast. But aggressive vaccine nationalism can impede the kind of international collaboration that is necessary to produce enough product to inoculate everyone who wants a shot. Normally vaccine exports are no problem for the EU, originally there wasn't even the mechanism that is now used to block that one shipment. Given all the circumstances (various vaccine exports still going on, Australia having a pretty calm Covid situation right now and starting production of their own AZ vaccine this month) I wonder if that shipment was deliberately chosen as a statement to get AZ to stop playing games while minimizing the impact it has on global efforts. (or maybe I'm giving bureaucrats too much credit) Of course a heads-up notice to Australia would have been nice if that was the case.

Stannary 6y ago

EU used its negotiating power to drive the price of covid vaccine down, and now producers are ignoring "low profit" EU contracts and selling vaccines to highest bidder.

s1artibartfast 6y ago
Do we actually know how the price the Australian gov negotiated compares?
StavrosK 6y ago
And for $1/dose, as if I want to save $2 instead of getting two doses more quickly... What the hell were they thinking?
pityJuke 6y ago
AZ is required by its contract with Oxford to sell at no profit during the pandemic period [1]. "A key element of Oxford’s partnership with AstraZeneca is the joint commitment to provide the vaccine on a not-for-profit basis for the duration of the pandemic across the world, and in perpetuity to low- and middle-income countries." [1]: https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2020-11-23-oxford-university-breakthrough-global-covid-19-vaccine https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2020-11-23-oxford-university-break...
mrtksn 6y ago
I wonder if there is push for this narrative with throwaway accounts? This was discussed many times, If I remember correctly the negotiatons were not on the price but on the liability issues etc. I mean, AZ says its selling at no-profit. Did EU made them to sell at loss then? What's the logic of this narrative?
- Stannary 6y ago
  https://observer.com/2020/11/covid19-vaccine-price-pfizer-moderna-astrazeneca-oxford/ https://observer.com/2020/11/covid19-vaccine-price-pfizer-mo... On Monday, AstraZeneca said it will provide vaccines at cost “in perpetuity” to low- and middle-income countries in the developing world. Do any of the Australia or EU belong to "low- and middle-income countries in the developing world"

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

raverbashing 6y ago

AZ missed several weekly deliveries to the EU recently, and was cutting shipment quantities. The fact that they were trying to export doesn't bode well to them pretending they're following "best effort" wording on the contract. Follow the contracts and you don't get your shipments blocked. Pfizer exports from Europe to Canada no problem. If this was the US or any other country I believe most of the comments would be positive.

jariel 6y ago
"Follow the contracts and you don't get your shipments blocked." This does not make any sense, it's worse than crude economic nationalism because it doesn't take other agreements into context. They were probably 'following the contracts' - but by the nature of the agreements - at least some shipments to go Australia. "The fact that they were trying to export doesn't bode well to them pretending they're following "best effort" wording on the contract." No - this is false. Everyone is behind on manufacturing - that we all accept. This means that shipments everywhere are going to be delayed. If they are late overall, then of course some shipments are going to go to other customers, while some shipments go to Italy. Your statement basically implies: "I don't care what your contracts are - Italy comes before all the other customers, if you don't ship to us, we are going to use emergency measures to screw you and your other customers". You're not saying: "respect the contract" You're saying: "respect our contract, we don't give a crap about anyone else's contract, because we have the power of the law to screw them" "If this was the US or any other country I believe most of the comments would be positive. " No, the news would roughly be the same: a nation screwed up in it's procurement, months behind other nations, is screwing up agreed deliveries to other nations because of a procurement failure. The EU's attempts to 'work together' to secure vaccines has been a big boondoggle, this is obvious.
- pgeorgi 6y ago
  > They were probably 'following the contracts' - but by the nature of the agreements - at least some shipments to go Australia There has been a shipment to Australia before: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-02-28/astrazeneca-oxford-vaccine-doses-arrive-in-australia/13201032 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-02-28/astrazeneca-oxford-va...

ArtemZ 6y ago

I'll get Sputnik V vaccine next week (I live in Russia). I wish there were less politics involved so everyone who needs it could get the vaccine without worrying that Putin's regime is behind it.

jamesrr39 6y ago

This is the second 'EU blocks export of AstraZeneca vaccine' headline (the other being the UK). It's interesting how the EU ends up carrying the backlash on both occasions, and AstraZeneca, who are the ones who ultimately over-committed and under-delivered, still comes out of it with relatively little PR damage.

prague60 6y ago
Isn't this because the EU let the US/UK take priority of production? I was under the impression AZ was filling their fulfillments to US/UK just fine. This seems like EU just couldn't keep up in the horse race negotiating.
- IfOnlyYouKnew 6y ago
  This is still the subject of debate, and, at some point, possibly a matter for the courts. What has emerged more recently is that the UK contract was, in contradiction of earlier statements, signed a day after the EU contract. The UK contract's text was also leaked somewhat accidentally, and it is almost identical to the previously-released EU contract. I've looked at them side-by-side and I'm just not enough of an armchair lawyer to make too much sense of 60-page contracts, but I couldn't quite see how the existing differences would constitute any clear priority for the UK.
  - tester89 6y ago
    Citations! I need to see this.
  - decodebytes 6y ago
    > signed a day after the EU contract. I have been following this quite closely, and this is complete new to me. I would really like to see a source on this, otherwise it should be considered false information.
    - IfOnlyYouKnew 6y ago

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

jeeeb 6y ago

As an Australian I actually don’t have much of a problem with this. I didn’t see it mentioned in the article but of the total of 53.4 million doses of AZ vaccine Australia has ordered 50 million are being manufactured in Australia. What’s more except for some minor outbreaks originating from returned traveller quarantine community transmission has been effectively stopped in Australia for the last 6 months. Even 1 case outside of returned traveller quarantine is big news and cause for internal travel restrictions. It’s been months since the last person died from COVID-19 and the economy has largely recovered to prepandemic GDP levels. Frankly this is a minor delay in Australia’s vaccine rollout and the doses will go to serving places that are frankly more in need.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]