31 ms·

Nonsense. This isn’t really about countries exporting/not exporting. These vaccine deals are with private companies who produce their product around the world.

• hamax 6y ago
  So both UK and US are bad guys since they're blocking all exports?
  • kjakm 6y ago
    I’m aware of the US blocking exports of certain things but as far as I know the UK isn’t. If you have evidence proving otherwise I’d love to see.
  • dbetteridge 6y ago
    Per the above, no. The UK purchased right of first refusal on the first 100million doses of Oxford/AZ produced in the UK factories that they funded. The EU also funded factories (in the EU) but did not purchase right of first refusal only best efforts contracts. The USA has a full ban on exports till they are ready to export.
  • heraclius 6y ago
    There is no UK prohibition on exports. The UK is not blocking exports. The EU were free to conclude contracts with the (not very productive) UK manufacturers at the same time HM government was doing so.
• dan-robertson 6y ago
  Sure it’s private companies but it wasn’t random chance that led to AstraZeneca (a British–Swedish company) working with the Oxford group in the U.K. or Pfizer (an American company) with BioNTech. It’s a lot easier to control production when it happens within your borders (eg Trump did have some executive order banning exports but this was just symbolic when the defence production act was invoked.)
  • jimbob45 6y ago
    BioNTech is German and Pfizer is American. Am I missing something?
    • dan-robertson 6y ago
      Pfizer has big factories in the US for making vaccines. How many does BioNTech have in Germany?
      • csnweb 6y ago
        They (BioNTech) themselves have only a few in Germany (2 or 3), but it's produced by other companies for them now as well totalling to around seven according to this German source: https://www.pharma-food.de/markt/standorte-corona-impfstoff-produktion-deutschland-338.html https://www.pharma-food.de/markt/standorte-corona-impfstoff-.... I say around because not all do the whole production sometimes only parts of it as it seems. Didn't dig very deep into it.
      • sitic 6y ago
        The current bottleneck in the Pfizer vaccine production is the last manufacturing stage — combining the mRNA with lipid nanoparticles. There are currently two plants for it, one in the US and one in Belgium. The US plant only delivers to the USA, the Belgian to the rest of the world. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pfizer%E2%80%93BioNTech_COVID-19_vaccine#Manufacturing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pfizer%E2%80%93BioNTech_COVID-...
        • 6y ago
• radicalbyte 6y ago
  The time-wasting meme is a lie from the UK Government. The UK contract was signed after the EU contract. They posted the contract by accident which was picked up on in some of the press. It also had the same clauses as the EU. On the other hand the UK still has a fully nationalised health service which means that it was in a much better position to be able to scale the vaccinations. That's probably the real reason that they're ahead. Give it another 10 years of Tory rule and they'll "catch down" to the rest of the world.
  • einarvollset 6y ago
    Sources? I've heard the "EU signed before UK" multiple times now, but nobody ever links to a source. It just seems unlikely, no? Why would they be so catastrophically far behind in that case? Similarly - the NHS is great, but not unique. Norway for example has a system akin to the NHS (and so do many EU countries) and there's no correlation there. Norway is waaaaay behind the UK and the US. Again, it seems unlikely that the NHS is the cause. It's obvious you hate the Tories, but that shouldn't cloud your judgment to such a degree that you fail to celebrate the real achievement of the UK's vaccination rate.
    • liversage 6y ago
      It's my impression that the vaccination program in Denmark is very efficient just like in the UK. However, the speed is limited by the vaccine imports which are governed by deals made by the EU. I would think that Norway is similarly limited by imports. (They are not in the EU so probably are making deals at a national level.)
      • petr_tik 6y ago
        Individual member states can approve their own vaccines. Look at Hungary. Italy wants to use and manufacture the Russian vaccine, but the EMA hasn’t approved it yet. Why not?
        • Strom 6y ago
• sprafa 6y ago
  You’re being fed misinformation. EU countries signed before the UK.
  • reddotX 6y ago
    most brexiteers only read the British tabloids. explains their disconnect with reality
    • kjakm 6y ago
      The parent comment is a reply to me so I’ll assume you’re also referring to me: 1. I voted remain and would again. 2. Everybody I’ve spoken to that actually lives in the EU agrees the EU has screwed up - it seems to mostly be remain voters who can’t move on who disagree with this. 3. If you have evidence contrary to my comment share it, keep the personal attacks to yourself.
      • Kliment 6y ago
        I actually live in the EU and I don't feel the commission has screwed up on this. I love that we have a somewhat equitable distribution model across the union. The core issues have been with producers heavily overpromising supply on the expectation that approval would take months longer, and with national politicians repeating those unrealistic promises verbatim to their populations to improve their popularity, and then blaming the EU when producers failed to deliver on their promises. AZ has been the worst about this, delivering dramatically less than promised, and have been scumbags in general about it, notifying the commission very late, sometimes after deadlines were already missed. Together with their refusal to be open about export movements EU->UK they've managed to create an enormous amount of suspicion.
  • thu2111 6y ago
    Can you give a citation for that. The generally agreed figure is that it was done 3 months later. Bear in mind, the EU has still not even approved production from the AZ Halix plant. EU has generally been doing things slower than the UK.
• hourislate 6y ago
  >Whichever country is contractually at the front of the line will have their order fulfilled first/according to the terms of the contracts. Tell that to Canada. They were securing doses from day one and still suffered from delayed shipments and now have to contend with countries of manufacture forbidding export. What really pisses me off is that the US Gov had 30 million doses of Astra for several months and it it isn't even approved for use. Why hoard it when you can save lives in other countries while you have no intention of using it soon if ever? Sure they might get their approval in May or June but by then I expect the other manufacturers to have ramped up to cover everyone everywhere.
  • plank_time 6y ago
    Sorry but this is a lie. Canada put all their eggs in the CanSino vaccine even though they knew they had a bad relationship with China. This summer China conveniently blocked all progress and Canada was left scrambling. Blame Trudeau not the US.
    • throwaway894345 6y ago
      I don’t think this is true? I recall an infographie from before vaccines had been deployed anywhere which showed where all of the countries were sourcing their vaccines from, in what quantities, etc, and I believe Canada was buying all sorts of vaccines so they would have much redundancy in case problems arose with any of them.
    • Waterluvian 6y ago
      This does not resemble truth. Canada bought in to a ton of vaccines. Something like 6 doses per Canadian worth.
    • jeromegv 6y ago
      You are lying. Canada has ordered 7 times the amount of population. From different manufacturers. You’re making things up. Biggest problem of Canada? There’s no local manufacture. And yes you can blame the liberals for that. Your anti Chinese talking point is not based in facts.
• deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
• benlumen 6y ago
  The original comment, and this retort, sums up the argument in a nutshell. I see both sides of this one, offered both of these arguments to a friend last night. It's complicated, like most of these things.
  • NoOneNew 6y ago
    Damn I hate saying this... but, to be fair to the pharma corps... ugh, I feel sick for saying that... manufacturing vaccines isn't like making plastic cups and straws. I'm in no way qualified to explain pharmaceutical production, but I highly doubt it's that simple to just Thanos snap produce these things. Equipment, QC, materials, whatever, it takes time. This on top of still having to produce all the other drugs we need to keep their pockets lined. Part two, I remember seeing something regarding specialty freezer storage for shelf life and general transport. I believe that's still valid? Not everywhere has the logistical bandwidth for transport or storage of this. Then take into the legally abiding procedures to ensure the safety of the drug itself, which we should all be thankful for. Piss poor pharma is already a problem as is, we don't need more issues. Then general legal hurdles of deployment and tracking, yada yada. This isn't like sewing up a mask, bubble wrap Fedex it out. Damn it, I defended pharma. I'm going to Hell for that.
    • cosmodisk 6y ago
      Nobody ever said the job's going to be easy,hence so few doing it and hence such a high reward,in a case of success.
    • hef19898 6y ago
      The world as we now it runs on supply chains. And yet, pople still think electricity comes from a plug, milk from bottle in a supermarket. As does toilet paper, and we all know how that worked out last year. That people have the expectation that once a contract for a vaccine is signed, and the vaccine is approved, enough doses are immediately available to inculate everyone id dangerous. Especially since a lot of politicians seem to think exactly the same way.
• crocodiletears 6y ago
  I'd argue that in a time of crisis, the EU government is being negligent if it's not forcing domestic production capacity to prioritize output for domestic use. If it nationalized the factories, or seized supply it hadn't ordered, I might consider it the bad guy. But irrespective of who gets the vaccines first, the EU has already bought the some portion of the supply.
  • cmarschner 6y ago
    The problem with this statement is that the EU is not a government - it is an intergovernmental body. Nationalization etc. happens on the national level only.
    • crocodiletears 6y ago
      Yes, but wrt nationalization, that was more a statement of where I would draw the line if I had to choose whether the EU was being a good/bad actor rather than the EU's actual capacity as an organization. I would argye that the EU merits government status, given the degree to which it dictates standards in the eurozone. Even though it is fairly weak, and lacks enforcement capacity on its own, my understanding is that the EU as a body has the capacity to set standards for the block as a whole, restricting export of certain goods like the vaccine for example. I could be wrong, though?
  • kjakm 6y ago
    > I'd argue that in a time of crisis, the EU government is being negligent if it's not forcing domestic production capacity to prioritize output for domestic use. I understand that viewpoint but feel like the long term consequences politically would be too high. We live in a globalised world where most of the richest countries do little of their own manufacturing. If we start blocking exports in times of crisis the foundations of that system would be damaged.
• sgift 6y ago
  > Nonsense. This isn’t really about countries exporting/not exporting. These vaccine deals are with private companies who produce their product around the world. Just because vaccines are manufactured in a specific country doesn’t make them property of that country. The US used the national defense production act to block any export of BioNTech/Pfizer vaccine produced in the US to other countries, so no, this is not just "These vaccine deals are with private companies who produce their product around the world." - countries can and do influence these deals if it benefits them. UK did the same thing.
  • petr_tik 6y ago
    The U.K. did not do the same as the US. Don’t conflate the ability to negotiate carefully with banning exports. The private company AZ signed a contract with the British govt according to which they can export once they have delivered the agreed doses to the U.K. the faster they deliver on their commitments, the faster they can start exporting. No one forced them to sign the deal and no one in the UK is banning exports of the vaccine.
    • emiliobumachar 6y ago
      I have no knowledge beyond what I just heard from you. That sounded implausible. The country which had the ability to negotiate that happened to be the same country where the doses were manufactured? Why couldn't the UK apply its careful negotiating skills elsewhere too? Alternative hypothesis: the credible implicit or explicit threats of a ban were what enabled the deal. "Sign this or else."
      • petr_tik 6y ago
        Even if the UK was threatening AZ with an export ban, they didn’t force AZ to accept those terms. AZ could have just said no and made the U.K. government look incompetent and unleashed media scrutiny on BoJo. Yes, having the industrial base is part of the attraction of the UK for pharmaceutical companies. As is having a skilled workforce and a reliable system of laws. I’m rejecting your original point about the U.S. and U.K. doing the same thing, which they aren’t.
• rorykoehler 6y ago
  To be nonsense it would need to also not have happened in practice. The UK and the US have not exported the vaccines and kept them all for themselves. This is fact not nonsense.
• riffraff 6y ago
  > Whichever country is contractually at the front of the line will have their order fulfilled first/according to the terms of the contracts. nope, the UK and the US have a "first us, then the rest" policy for exports, that the EU does not.
• linux-user 6y ago
  The UK is already blocking exports. They basically paid off AZ to have the export ban written down in the contract.