2 ms·

Presumably you're being intentionally obtuse, but whatever. France (and Germany) initially said the recommendation for those groups was pending additional data

by morsch 6y ago

Presumably you're being intentionally obtuse, but whatever. France (and Germany) initially said the recommendation for those groups was pending additional data on efficacy in those age groups, which was lacking in the phase 3 trials. This data has since been submitted and the recommendation extended to elderly people.

chrisseaton 6y ago
> initially said the recommendation for those groups was pending additional data on efficacy in those age groups Hang on that’s not not actually what the French said is it? They actually said there was data and that the data said it was ineffective.
- morsch 6y ago
  "Last month France approved use of the vaccine for under-65s only, citing lack of data for older people." https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-56242617 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-56242617
  - chrisseaton 6y ago
    But if you read more carefully what they specifically said was: > Everything points to thinking it is quasi-ineffective on people older than 65, some say those 60 years or older. So they said there was data that said it was ineffective, not that there wasn't enough data.
    - morsch 6y ago
      Apparently Macron said that, though I can find very little beyond that one quote. I doubt that's what the vaccination boards (whatever their equivalent of the EMA is) in France said when they recommended limiting vaccination to under <threshold age>, but I haven't really looked it up. The German Stiko was quite clear on it, anyway. Edit to add: ... and while Stiko, ie. the vaccination board, was quite clear on it, I'm sure there were like two dozen high ranking politicians in Germany in January who either didn't read or were unable to understand the Stiko recommendation and claimed that AZ is known to be ineffective. Most politicians aren't trained scientists, and unfortunately it shows.

2 ms·

Presumably you're being intentionally obtuse, but whatever. France (and Germany) initially said the recommendation for those groups was pending additional data

by morsch 6y ago

chrisseaton 6y ago
> initially said the recommendation for those groups was pending additional data on efficacy in those age groups Hang on that’s not not actually what the French said is it? They actually said there was data and that the data said it was ineffective.
- morsch 6y ago
  "Last month France approved use of the vaccine for under-65s only, citing lack of data for older people." https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-56242617 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-56242617
  - chrisseaton 6y ago
    But if you read more carefully what they specifically said was: > Everything points to thinking it is quasi-ineffective on people older than 65, some say those 60 years or older. So they said there was data that said it was ineffective, not that there wasn't enough data.
    - morsch 6y ago
      Apparently Macron said that, though I can find very little beyond that one quote. I doubt that's what the vaccination boards (whatever their equivalent of the EMA is) in France said when they recommended limiting vaccination to under <threshold age>, but I haven't really looked it up. The German Stiko was quite clear on it, anyway. Edit to add: ... and while Stiko, ie. the vaccination board, was quite clear on it, I'm sure there were like two dozen high ranking politicians in Germany in January who either didn't read or were unable to understand the Stiko recommendation and claimed that AZ is known to be ineffective. Most politicians aren't trained scientists, and unfortunately it shows.