4 ms·

I'm surprised they still bother. I think with all the concerns surrounding it it's better to just agree to cancel the contracts and move to better vaccines. The

I'm surprised they still bother. I think with all the concerns surrounding it it's better to just agree to cancel the contracts and move to better vaccines. The mRNA ones in particular seem to work a lot better with less issues. Or perhaps this is the goal of the lawsuit? I would assume AstraZeneca would object to cancelling the contract even though they're not delivering on schedule. Perhaps they're planning to use this as leverage.

cmrdporcupine 6y ago
The mRNA vaccines are much more expensive both in procurement and in handling, requiring more stringent refrigeration. AZ was supposed to be the "long tail" vaccine that could be produced for $2-$5 a dose and stored in regular refrigeration. It has great promise, hopefully the supply issues can be worked out.
- GekkePrutser 6y ago
  The extreme refrigeration requirement for Pfizer was dropped: https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/02/pfizer-vaccine-rollout-might-get-a-lot-easier-ultra-cold-storage-not-required/ https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/02/pfizer-vaccine-rollo... But yes they are more expensive. Still, I'd gladly pay that for a better vaccine even if I had to pay it myself.
  - the-dude 6y ago
    What makes the other vaccines better than the AZ one?
    - marvin 6y ago
      Higher likelihood of preventing serious illness, including from variants. Fewer reports of serious side effects, especially side effects that preclude vaccination from an ethics perspective in certain age cohorts and regions.
    - rsynnott 6y ago
      Higher apparent efficacy, and the manufacturers, Pfizer-Biontec in particular, have actually been able to reliably produce the stuff.
  - cmrdporcupine 6y ago
    My understanding is that even the amended refrigeration requirements are still more restrictive than for AZ. Also not clear to me that all jursidictions are following the modified refrigeration standards.
tchalla 6y ago
> I think with all the concerns surrounding it it's better to just agree to cancel the contracts and move to better vaccines. That's exactly what EU is doing. > Former German defense minister von der Leyen said the EU would only buy vaccines using mRNA technology — such as Pfizer and Moderna — for the next round of jabbing drives. ... > Recently, the bloc decided not to exercise its options for another 300 million doses from AstraZeneca https://www.dw.com/en/eu-sues-astrazeneca-over-delayed-deliveries-of-covid-19-vaccine/a-57338626 https://www.dw.com/en/eu-sues-astrazeneca-over-delayed-deliv... The reason for the lawsuit is to hold up a contract. > When signing the contract with the EU, AstraZeneca committed to make its "best reasonable efforts" to deliver 180 million vaccine doses to the bloc in the second quarter of this year, making up a total of 300 million in the period from December to June. Last month, however, AstraZeneca said it would aim to deliver only one-third of that. You don't sign up for a contract with the world's largest trading bloc and simply neg them. There are consequences and EU wants to ensure there will be some.
libertine 6y ago
>Or perhaps this is the goal of the lawsuit? I would assume AstraZeneca would object to cancelling the contract even though they're not delivering on schedule. Perhaps they're planning to use this as leverage. I think that's the goal, to press AZ to say: "we won't be able to deliver the contract", and cancel it/pull the remain of the upfront payment they got. For a long time that it looks like everyone in the EU side is fed up with dealing with AZ management, which are in their turn also probably fed up with dealing with EU reps.
ahartmetz 6y ago
Possibly intended as a distraction from the EU commission's mishandling of vaccine buying. They tried to get a low price instead of as much as possible as fast as possible.
rsynnott 6y ago
> I'm surprised they still bother. I think with all the concerns surrounding it it's better to just agree to cancel the contracts and move to better vaccines. Well, if nothing else, it's a 9 figure contract; if it can't get delivery the EC presumably wants its money back.
kcartlidge 6y ago
> I'm surprised they still bother. I think with all the concerns surrounding it it's better to just agree to cancel the contracts and move to better vaccines. I agree with the surprise and the concerns (though most are FUD, misunderstanding, and politics). The point about better vaccines is a little unfair though. Initially regulators were hopeful for 50% efficacy for any vaccine. Depending upon the various studies and permutations the vaccines all fall within a few % of each other and at a rate far higher than hoped for. The variance is small enough to not be a concern. The blood clot incident rates are tiny and whilst unfortunately people do experience them the MHRA (UK) reports 38 per 11.5 million for Pfizer and 30 per 9.7 million for AZ, making them virtually identical (Pfizer slightly worse but with such small numbers that really isn't significant so I'm not claiming Pfizer is worse just that neither is AZ). We'd expect 3,000 clots per month in the UK in normal times anyway. And even if we say that these are unusual clots, the numbers remain small and AZ is not unusual in this regard. AZ isn't perfect - but it's beyond good enough and not particularly poorer than its peers.

cmrdporcupine 6y ago

The mRNA vaccines are much more expensive both in procurement and in handling, requiring more stringent refrigeration. AZ was supposed to be the "long tail" vaccine that could be produced for $2-$5 a dose and stored in regular refrigeration. It has great promise, hopefully the supply issues can be worked out.

GekkePrutser 6y ago
The extreme refrigeration requirement for Pfizer was dropped: https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/02/pfizer-vaccine-rollout-might-get-a-lot-easier-ultra-cold-storage-not-required/ https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/02/pfizer-vaccine-rollo... But yes they are more expensive. Still, I'd gladly pay that for a better vaccine even if I had to pay it myself.
- the-dude 6y ago
  What makes the other vaccines better than the AZ one?
  - marvin 6y ago
    Higher likelihood of preventing serious illness, including from variants. Fewer reports of serious side effects, especially side effects that preclude vaccination from an ethics perspective in certain age cohorts and regions.
  - rsynnott 6y ago
    Higher apparent efficacy, and the manufacturers, Pfizer-Biontec in particular, have actually been able to reliably produce the stuff.
- cmrdporcupine 6y ago
  My understanding is that even the amended refrigeration requirements are still more restrictive than for AZ. Also not clear to me that all jursidictions are following the modified refrigeration standards.

tchalla 6y ago

> I think with all the concerns surrounding it it's better to just agree to cancel the contracts and move to better vaccines. That's exactly what EU is doing. > Former German defense minister von der Leyen said the EU would only buy vaccines using mRNA technology — such as Pfizer and Moderna — for the next round of jabbing drives. ... > Recently, the bloc decided not to exercise its options for another 300 million doses from AstraZeneca https://www.dw.com/en/eu-sues-astrazeneca-over-delayed-deliveries-of-covid-19-vaccine/a-57338626 https://www.dw.com/en/eu-sues-astrazeneca-over-delayed-deliv... The reason for the lawsuit is to hold up a contract. > When signing the contract with the EU, AstraZeneca committed to make its "best reasonable efforts" to deliver 180 million vaccine doses to the bloc in the second quarter of this year, making up a total of 300 million in the period from December to June. Last month, however, AstraZeneca said it would aim to deliver only one-third of that. You don't sign up for a contract with the world's largest trading bloc and simply neg them. There are consequences and EU wants to ensure there will be some.

libertine 6y ago

>Or perhaps this is the goal of the lawsuit? I would assume AstraZeneca would object to cancelling the contract even though they're not delivering on schedule. Perhaps they're planning to use this as leverage. I think that's the goal, to press AZ to say: "we won't be able to deliver the contract", and cancel it/pull the remain of the upfront payment they got. For a long time that it looks like everyone in the EU side is fed up with dealing with AZ management, which are in their turn also probably fed up with dealing with EU reps.

ahartmetz 6y ago

Possibly intended as a distraction from the EU commission's mishandling of vaccine buying. They tried to get a low price instead of as much as possible as fast as possible.

rsynnott 6y ago

> I'm surprised they still bother. I think with all the concerns surrounding it it's better to just agree to cancel the contracts and move to better vaccines. Well, if nothing else, it's a 9 figure contract; if it can't get delivery the EC presumably wants its money back.

kcartlidge 6y ago

> I'm surprised they still bother. I think with all the concerns surrounding it it's better to just agree to cancel the contracts and move to better vaccines. I agree with the surprise and the concerns (though most are FUD, misunderstanding, and politics). The point about better vaccines is a little unfair though. Initially regulators were hopeful for 50% efficacy for any vaccine. Depending upon the various studies and permutations the vaccines all fall within a few % of each other and at a rate far higher than hoped for. The variance is small enough to not be a concern. The blood clot incident rates are tiny and whilst unfortunately people do experience them the MHRA (UK) reports 38 per 11.5 million for Pfizer and 30 per 9.7 million for AZ, making them virtually identical (Pfizer slightly worse but with such small numbers that really isn't significant so I'm not claiming Pfizer is worse just that neither is AZ). We'd expect 3,000 clots per month in the UK in normal times anyway. And even if we say that these are unusual clots, the numbers remain small and AZ is not unusual in this regard. AZ isn't perfect - but it's beyond good enough and not particularly poorer than its peers.