Big picture though, the EU is only about a month behind the US and 5-6 weeks behind the UK in their vaccine rollout. I don't think the economic benefit for us relative to the EU is going to be significant. However, in terms of deaths, it will be significant

It could make a big difference if this advantage in vaccination rate blunts the third wave enough to avoid another round of lockdowns. Things currently look as if the vaccinations will arrive exactly those 5-6 weeks too late in continental Europe. If everyone above the age of 70 or perhaps 65 was vaccinated as of today, instead of just 75% of the 80+ age group, then we could probably let this wave rip through without overburdening our ICUs.

The US in particular could get lucky - if they are struck by a B.1.1.7-induced wave at all, it will hit a few weeks later than in the EU. This, coupled with their higher vaccination rate, might turn it into a non-factor as far as restrictions of public life are concerned.

the longer it takes the higher new risks will become

german politics is fearmongering about the mutations right now, but it could actually be a problem later

not only are we facing new lockdowns for the next flu season, if not earlier, but also that brazilian mutation that is in the news now

we need herd immunity asap or we will get a "oh shit, the current vaccine doesnt work anymore, get a new one and stay home for another year"

and i really prefer that route, because we are slowly approaching a scenario where the people will force things to reopen, corona burns through the population and every sacrifice so far was in vain

This post was edited by JohnnyMcCoy on Mar 24 2021 02:50pm

Nice deflection, now focus on your shitty leaders completely messing up the vaccine rollout which was the most important decision for them to make last year. Sheer incompetence?

They sold their supply to countries which invested in the process and spent liberally. They (apparently) offered any remaining supply to the EU. I don't think that's a bad thing.

It sounds like the EU made a terrible procurement decision, and simply assumed that supply would be available.

Their contracts with the EU contain a specific delivery goal of 300m initial doses for the EU, with an option for an additional 100m. They did not offer the EU an open-ended, unspecified number of doses, they put a hard number into the contract which was directly conflicting with their other commitment and clearly was more than they could deliver.

Take a look at the key section of the purchase agreement:


Here's the link to the full APA:
https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/api/files/attachment/867990/APA%20-%20AstraZeneca.pdf




I dont think that one can fault the EU for expecting something in the order of 300m doses after signing a contract like this. Sure, they knew about the best efforts clause and that they might get somewhat less than 300m doses - but not less than half that figure, and particularly not while AZ is fully satisfying its commitment to other purchasers like the UK or the US.

eu slowly falling apart but pretending its not

true, but the same could be said about the US and the UK; and the same tendencies are also there in Israel and Canada.

Please elaborate on this. I can understand the UK being in that category but not the others