International COVID-19 Megathread

[Tender Branson]

Pretty bizarre debate going on here right now about Tyrol:

Because there have been several mutations of the UK and South Africa variant in Tyrol recently, a virologist said that Tyrol should be sealed off and quarantined from the rest of Austria and Europe for one month:



That is idiotic in my opinion, because even though these mutations are there (for 3 weeks now), the number of new cases in Tyrol (= 7-day incidence) is actually far below the Austrian rate. It suggests that while the mutations are there, the measures to contain a further spread worked and only a handful of active cases with these variants remain in Tyrol. So far, there's also no indication that they are more infectious and leading to an explosion in cases. Total fearmongering IMO.

Out of 35.000 daily PCR tests right now, only 1.200 come back positive. These numbers actually didn't change over the past weeks and remain at an elevated, but slightly decreasing level.

Meanwhile, Bavarian PM Söder attacks Austria's plans for easing the lockdown on Monday and opening up the retail stores, schools and services providers such as hairdressers.

But what's his solution ? Keeping them closed forever, leading to mass unemployment ?

Also, Austria is expected to receive 10 Portuguese patients, but a date is yet to be confirmed.

Hopefully, they survive the long flight and can be treated successfully here.

[Tender Branson]

Austrian economy declined fastest among all 27 EU member countries in Q4:

https://www.thelocal.at/20210203/austrias-economy-sees-biggest-slump-in-eu

That's on a quarter-by-quarter basis (Q4 compared with Q3).

On a year-on-year basis (Q4 2020 compared with Q4 2019), Spain had the biggest decline (-9%) followed by Austria (-8%).

Tourism sectors in both countries are making up a big share of the economy and in Austria's case winter tourism has been pretty much dead this season - except for domestic tourists.

[jaichind]

https://www.indiatoday.in/cities/delhi/story/over-56-of-delhi-has-covid-19-antibodies-health-minister-satyendar-jain-on-5th-serosurvey-1765192-2021-02-02

New Delhi survey has 56% antibody positive.  It seems India is headed towards herd immunity.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/india-coronavirus-cases/2021/02/04/d7f92f72-6562-11eb-bab8-707f8769d785_story.html

pretty much making the same point: that urban India most likely reached herd immunity.

India’s big cities probably have “reached the threshold of population immunity,” said Giridhar Babu, an epidemiologist at the Public Health Foundation of India. The virus will continue to spread, he added, but “the quantum of infected cases will not be the same.”

BTW, Pakistan and Bangladesh pretty much in the same situation without the disastrous Indian lockdowns of the Spring of 2020.  As the virus burns through rural areas and the South and they reach herd immunity India is on the way to beating the virus with our without the vaccine or any more lockdowns.

[𝕭𝖆𝖕𝖙𝖎𝖘𝖙𝖆 𝕸𝖎𝖓𝖔𝖑𝖆]

Italy's numbers seem to have stabilized, which is pretty bad since they are still too damn high, but fortunately not nearly as high as e.g. United Kingdom or Portugal.

Ah also restrictions now are officially regionally-based, with regions divided into "zones" (from the strictest to least, red zone, orange zone, yellow zone, and maybe a white zone will be introduced as well?) based on how badly the outbreak is looking in each one.
Liguria is in the yellow zone right now, which means restrictions are quite loose but there are still funny things like a 10 pm curfew about doing stuff in general and a 6 pm curfew about eating and drinking inside establishments, and what can I say, it feels completely random.

Liguria entered orange zone a couple days ago, which is so annoying since I can't eat and drink inside establishments at all and there are weird and complicated rules about leaving one's municipality.

I just don't get it, it doesn't look to me that our rates are getting worse these very days.

Liguria is back again in yellow zone. Yes!

New cases in Italy are continuing to fall, and new deaths as well. We have gotten over 90,000 total deaths however.

I haven't really followed the development of our vaccination campaign at all, but it seems it's going decently? Of course with the government crisis going on right now, that sucks most of the attention in any case.

[Omega21]

In summary, the EU Covid vaccine program has been a complete disaster, and every member state is suffering as a result.

It has gotten to the point that the country vaccinating the fastest in continental Europe is a developing country with a fraction of the resources, namely Serbia, which as a result of abundant vaccines (from China, Russia, and Biotech/Pfizer) has been able to almost completely reopen while we are stuck in lockdown limbo.

https://www.krone.at/2332483

This is because instead of actually prioritizing health and the economy, the EU is playing geopolitics by not authorizing vaccines like Sputnik, which has been positively reviewed by even peers of the Lancet.

Meanwhile, we are allowing AstraZeneca, which has been shown to be ineffective against Covid mutations, but hey, it's at least a western vaccinee amIrite?

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-health-coronavirus-astrazeneca-varian/oxford-astrazeneca-covid-shot-less-effective-against-south-african-variant-study-idUKKBN2A60RH

I don't care if it has Kim Jong Un's face slapped all over it. If it works, and if it's safe we need it yesterday.

[Silent Hunter]

AstraZeneca is not ineffective against mutations - it's less so at preventing mild and moderate illness, but still seems to protect against serious illness and death. That is good enough for most.

[Omega21]

AstraZeneca is not ineffective against mutations - it's less so at preventing mild and moderate illness, but still seems to protect against serious illness and death. That is good enough for most.

Well, the Russians seem to have done it better, so unless there's some new data that says otherwise, they should be the ones getting access to the market first. The Chinese vaccine is also said to be fairly effective, and the EU can pull data from Serbia as they already have over a million doses. Their vaccine uses also very simple, traditional technology (inactivated virus), which has been in use for decades.

Plus:

Italy agency cautious on AstraZeneca jab for over 55s
Spain limits AstraZeneca jab to the under-55s

Not very reassuring to be honest.

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2021-01-italy-agency-cautious-astrazeneca-jab.html
https://medicalxpress.com/news/2021-02-spain-limits-astrazeneca-jab-under-55s.html

[Silent Hunter]

We're also getting plenty of data on AstraZeneca from the UK.

[Omega21]

We're also getting plenty of data on AstraZeneca from the UK.

And that's great, but every day we are not importing Sputnik and Sinopharm is another day of massive economic turmoil, degradation of mental health, and of course, a day of new infections and deaths.

It may be great for you because you get preferential treatment in terms of deliveries. And you should, you're the ones making it.

But when you look at continental Europe and see the fastest vaccinating nation is a developing one, and see the pure lack of vaccines in much wealthier EU countries, then they should consider going down the neutral path and buying from everyone, not just geopolitical partners.

[Middle-aged Europe]

Like any other vaccine, Sputnik V must be approved by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) first. Russia filed an application for EMA approval on January 20 this year. Now Sputnik V will have to undergo the same procedure as any other vaccine before it.

It's true that the EU didn't take any initiative on its own to acquire the Russian vaccine last year. But keep in mind that Russia's early approval of Sputnik V had drawn widespread criticism because it had been the only COVID vaccine to get approval prior to the completion of the Phase III trials. Therefore it had been unclear whether this particular vaccine was safe to adminster, at least by generally accepted WHO standards. And of course, the EU and its member states obviously didn't anticipate the current vaccine shortage on the continent, therefore eliminating the apparent need for additional or alternative vaccines.

Since then, further research into Sputnik V has taken place and by now we know that it is probably about as safe and effective as any other vaccine. I don't what's the state of debate regarding Sputnik V in Austria, but in Germany several leading politicians including the Chancellor and the health minister have already said that dosages of the Sputnik V should be acquired and administered to the population once it has been approved by the EMA.

Considering the edge the United States, the United Kingdom, or Israel have in vaccinating their own populations I agree that EMA approval procedures (as well as the EU's vaccine acquisition policies) probably need to be streamlined and made much more efficient. But that's a problem that doesn't have anything to do with Russia.

[Omega21]

Like any other vaccine, Sputnik V must be approved by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) first. Russia filed an application for EMA approval on January 20 this year. Now Sputnik V will have to undergo the same procedure as any other vaccine before it.

It's true that the EU didn't take any initiative on its own to acquire the Russian vaccine last year. But keep in mind that Russia's early approval of Sputnik V had drawn widespread criticism because it had been the only COVID vaccine to get approval prior to the completion of the Phase III trials. Therefore it had been unclear whether this particular vaccine was safe to adminster, at least by generally accepted WHO standards. And of course, the EU and its member states obviously didn't anticipate the current vaccine shortage on the continent, therefore eliminating the apparent need for additional or alternative vaccines.

Since then, further research into Sputnik V has taken place and by now we know that it is probably about as safe and effective as any other vaccine. I don't what's the state of debate regarding Sputnik V in Austria, but in Germany several leading politicians including the Chancellor and the health minister have already said that dosages of the Sputnik V should be acquired and administered to the population once it has been approved by the EMA.

Considering the edge the United States, the United Kingdom, or Israel have in vaccinating their own populations I agree that EMA approval procedures (as well as the EU's vaccine acquisition policies) probably need to be streamlined and made much more efficient. But that's a problem that doesn't have anything to do with Russia.

So, what's taking them so long?

AstraZeneca was approved despite still standing massive concerns, but they were wary of the Russian one because it was so effective they could start using it before completing Phase 3 trials? Isn't it logical you want to evaluate the first available vaccine ASAP without waiting for them to take the initiative? This has very much to do with Russia. We jumped to test and evaluate every possible western vaccine, and basically ignored anything that isn't from a geopolitical ally, even though they got there FIRST.

Plus, it's clear the EMA is just a ball and chain to member states. Hungary is using Sputnik already, and I'll praise that despite the other obvious concerns I have with their Govt.

All arguments for the EMA are just "well you know that's the procedure". Really? This is not the time for bureaucracy and procedures, and seeing as Hungary is already legally using Sputnik, it's obvious there are legal instruments in place to circumvent the bureaucracy.

Budapest will receive two million doses over the next three months.

So, that plus the other EU approved vaccinees basically means the pandemic will be largely over for them before the summer. So yeah, thousands in other EU countries could have been saved by sane and timely action to evaluate it months ago, and I don't really think "oh yeah they should have been a bit faster" is harsh enough criticism considering the number of lives that will be lost as a result of inaction and geopolitical games.

https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2021/02/07/hungary-approves-russias-sputnik-v-vaccine-a72853

[Middle-aged Europe]

Like any other vaccine, Sputnik V must be approved by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) first. Russia filed an application for EMA approval on January 20 this year. Now Sputnik V will have to undergo the same procedure as any other vaccine before it.

It's true that the EU didn't take any initiative on its own to acquire the Russian vaccine last year. But keep in mind that Russia's early approval of Sputnik V had drawn widespread criticism because it had been the only COVID vaccine to get approval prior to the completion of the Phase III trials. Therefore it had been unclear whether this particular vaccine was safe to adminster, at least by generally accepted WHO standards. And of course, the EU and its member states obviously didn't anticipate the current vaccine shortage on the continent, therefore eliminating the apparent need for additional or alternative vaccines.

Since then, further research into Sputnik V has taken place and by now we know that it is probably about as safe and effective as any other vaccine. I don't what's the state of debate regarding Sputnik V in Austria, but in Germany several leading politicians including the Chancellor and the health minister have already said that dosages of the Sputnik V should be acquired and administered to the population once it has been approved by the EMA.

Considering the edge the United States, the United Kingdom, or Israel have in vaccinating their own populations I agree that EMA approval procedures (as well as the EU's vaccine acquisition policies) probably need to be streamlined and made much more efficient. But that's a problem that doesn't have anything to do with Russia.

So, what's taking them so long?

AstraZeneca was approved despite still standing massive concerns, but they were wary of the Russian one because it was so effective they could start using it before completing Phase 3 trials? Isn't it logical you want to evaluate the first available vaccine ASAP without waiting for them to take the initiative? This has very much to do with Russia. We jumped to test and evaluate every possible western vaccine, and basically ignored anything that isn't from a geopolitical ally, even though they got there FIRST.

Plus, it's clear the EMA is just a ball and chain to member states. Hungary is using Sputnik already, and I'll praise that despite the other obvious concerns I have with their Govt.

All arguments for the EMA are just "well you know that's the procedure". Really? This is not the time for bureaucracy and procedures, and seeing as Hungary is already legally using Sputnik, it's obvious there are legal instruments in place to circumvent the bureaucracy.

Budapest will receive two million doses over the next three months.

So, that plus the other EU approved vaccinees basically means the pandemic will be largely over for them before the summer. So yeah, thousands in other EU countries could have been saved by sane and timely action to evaluate it months ago, and I don't really think "oh yeah they should have been a bit faster" is harsh enough criticism considering the number of lives that will be lost as a result of inaction and geopolitical games.

https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2021/02/07/hungary-approves-russias-sputnik-v-vaccine-a72853

First of all, with regards to granting EMA approvals the European Medicines Agency doesn't actually "take the initiative" on evaluating any of the vaccines. Any approval procedure requires the filing of an application by the developer of the vaccine, irrespective of the vaccine's country of origin. So again, that's an issue that hasn't anything to do with specifically Russia.

AstraZeneca filed for EMA approval on January 12 and the approval was granted on January 29. That's a timespan of 17 days. (Just like in Sputnik V's case, Hungary decided to forego the EMA and approved the AstraZeneca vaccine before the EU did.)

Biontech/Pfizer had filed for EMA approval on December 1 and approval was granted on December 21. That's a timespan of 20 days.

Moderna had filed for EMA approval on November 30 and approval was granted on January 6. That's a timespan of 37 days.

Like I said, the Russian developers of Sputnik V filed for EMA approval on January 20. If approval takes as long as it did with Moderna (and not AstraZeneca), it actually won't be granted before February 26. As for your question "what's taking them so long?"... I would say I lack the medical background knowledge to fully ascertain that. If I had the time maybe I would try to research it on the Web.

However, I haven't seen any evidence that Sputnik V approval takes longer as it does in AstraZeneca's case because of "political reasons" and if it were the case I would consider that grossly negligient and borderline criminal. But, on the contrary, the German government has in fact tasked the Paul Ehrlich Institute - the German medical regulatory body and federal institute for vaccines and biomedicines - with assisting the EMA in evaluating Sputnik V in an effort to speed up the process.

Granted, Russia probably would have filed for EMA approval much earlier than January 20 had the EU actually ordered dosages of the vaccine last summer or fall. But like I said, at that time they had worked under the assumption that they had already ordered sufficient dosages from other developers (obviously they were wrong about that one) and in addition there had still been serious doubts about Sputnik V's viability.

Doubts that - as I understand it with my limited knowledge of medicine - went in fact beyond not finishing Phase III trials as it was in AstraZeneca's case. In addition to the incomplete Phase III the results from the prior phases hadn't been released by Russia to the international scientific community at the time of the vaccine's initial approval and when they finally did relase them there had been reports that the data had been doctored with (for instance here, in German: https://www.spiegel.de/wissenschaft/medizin/corona-russlands-impfstoff-sputnik-v-forscher-finden-hinweise-auf-manipulation-a-a092d1ef-5c32-4527-89cd-7d9d6193270c). These are all issues that simply haven't arisen with AstraZeneca.

So, maybe Russia's distrust of the West had led to a delayed release of - perhaps then redacted - scientific data. Which then had led to the EU distrusting the viability of the Russian vaccine and an omittance of ordering Sputnik V dosages. Be it as it may, it seems they have started to learn from their mistake since an EMA approval of Sputnik V can maybe be expected for sometime this month, with the assistance of the aforementioned Paul Ehrlich Insitute.

[Middle-aged Europe]

I would add that the day before yesterday the EU's High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Josep Borell, had expressed his hope that Sputnik V will soon be approved by the EMA:

https://apnews.com/article/europe-moscow-coronavirus-pandemic-europe-russia-85239af999ba147cc8d305f14f610bbe

I'm not working on the assumption that Borell was lying on this one while somehow secretly working to sabotage Sputnik V's approval.

[Omega21]

Granted, Russia probably would have filed for EMA approval much earlier than January 20 had the EU actually ordered dosages of the vaccine last summer or fall. But like I said, at that time they had worked under the assumption that they had already ordered sufficient dosages from other developers (obviously they were wrong about that one) and in addition there had still been serious doubts about Sputnik V's viability.

This is the whole point I'm arguing.

It is incredibly dumb to "assume" we would have enough and not order a solid amount as a backup ASAP. As you said, they would have applied months earlier, and a lot of us would probably be immunized by now.

 One week of lockdown costs Austria 1 Billion euros. 200 Million Sputnik doses (100 Mil people) would have cost us under 2 Billion euros (under $10 for export).
https://kurier.at/wirtschaft/kocher-lockdown-koennte-pro-woche-1-bis-15-mrd-euro-kosten/401099214

So, needless to say, the cost is literally a rounding error in the EU Budget for this year.

Saying "well, they got it wrong" does not cut it. You cannot just assume something when you can have a backup or multiple backups, and if all goes well, you can start donating it to least-developed nations.

It's like we are talking about teenagers, so getting something wrong is nothing special. Them getting something wrong means countless deaths, a depressed economy, and degradation of mental health. This is not something anyone should be allowed to get wrong.

The whole message this year has been "If you're not under the EMA, you're doing much better." The UK is, Serbia is, and Hungary will be too because they're not waiting around for them like fools.

Think about that for a second and about what kind of message that sends about the EU's overall competency.

Lastly, it's not about now. We could have been using them for at least a couple of months as we speak. It's better late than never, but that delay has cost us dearly.

[Middle-aged Europe]

Granted, Russia probably would have filed for EMA approval much earlier than January 20 had the EU actually ordered dosages of the vaccine last summer or fall. But like I said, at that time they had worked under the assumption that they had already ordered sufficient dosages from other developers (obviously they were wrong about that one) and in addition there had still been serious doubts about Sputnik V's viability.

This is the whole point I'm arguing.

It is incredibly dumb to "assume" we would have enough and not order a solid amount as a backup ASAP. As you said, they would have applied months earlier, and a lot of us would probably be immunized by now.

 One week of lockdown costs Austria 1 Billion euros. 200 Million Sputnik doses (100 Mil people) would have cost us under 2 Billion euros (under $10 for export).
https://kurier.at/wirtschaft/kocher-lockdown-koennte-pro-woche-1-bis-15-mrd-euro-kosten/401099214

So, needless to say, the cost is literally a rounding error in the EU Budget for this year.

Saying "well, they got it wrong" does not cut it. You cannot just assume something when you can have a backup or multiple backups, and if all goes well, you can start donating it to least-developed nations.

It's like we are talking about teenagers, so getting something wrong is nothing special. Them getting something wrong means countless deaths, a depressed economy, and degradation of mental health. This is not something anyone should be allowed to get wrong, and if so, should be immediately removed and replaced.

The whole message this year has been "If you're not under the EMA, you're doing much better." The UK is, Serbia is, and Hungary will be too because they're not waiting around for them like fools.

Think about that for a second and about what kind of message that sends about the EU's overall competency.

Lastly, it's not about now. We could have been using them for at least a couple of months as we speak. It's better late than never, but that delay has cost us dearly, and there should be consequences for those who didn't do their jobs right.

I don't have any doubt that the EU made serious errors in planning their vaccination campaign, which were probably also the result of unadressed structural deficits.

I wouldn't necessarily count not ordering Sputnik V dosages during last summer among them though. You don't order a vaccine where - at least at that time - serious and multiple doubts about its viability exists. That too could have been considered an irresponsible decision.

And the US, the UK, or Israel certainly did reasonably well so far in vaccinating their own populations without having ordered any of the Russian vaccine for themselves at any point.

I mean my view of Sputnik V has also evolved over the last few months. Last fall, with the information I had at that time, that stuff seemed a bit fishy to me too. But by now, additional research has indicated that it might actually be quite good.

But like I said, it's probably all a result of "they didn't trust us, we didn't trust them".

[Omega21]

I don't have any doubt that the EU made serious errors in planning their vaccination campaign, which were probably also the result of unadressed structural deficits.

I wouldn't necessarily count not ordering Sputnik V dosages during last summer among them though. You don't order a vaccine where - at least at that time - serious and multiple doubts about its viability exists. That too could have been considered an irresponsible decision.

And the US, the UK, or Israel certainly did reasonably well so far in vaccinating their own populations without having ordered any of the Russian vaccine for themselves at any point.

I mean my view of Sputnik V has also evolved over the last few months. Last fall, with the information I had at that time, that stuff seemed a bit fishy to me too. But by now, additional research has indicated that it might actually be quite good.

But like I said, it's probably all a result of "they didn't trust us, we didn't trust them".

The US and the UK have their own vaccines, and as a result, get priority.

Israel doesn't but has a very deep relationship with the US, and a small population, putting them at the front of the line.

Despite that, on November 12th, 2020, basically 3 months earlier:

Israel in talks with Russia for Sputnik V COVID-19 vaccine

Hadassah confirms Israel to receive Russia's 92% effective COVID vaccine

Basically a great example for my point. Backup, backup, and more backup. Even though they didn't need it in the end because they received plenty of Pfizer doses, they planned for alternatives. Something which should be common sense considering the non-existent cost and the extreme consequences of actually not having a backup.

As for the last part you mentioned, I most definitely agree. But that is no excuse for our leaders not to have secured at least 5+ vaccine sources for the EU already.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-israel-russia/israel-in-talks-with-russia-over-sputnik-v-covid-19-vaccine-pm-says-idUKKBN27W29J

https://www.jpost.com/breaking-news/russias-sputnik-v-covid-19-vaccine-candidate-92-percent-effective-study-shows-648740

[Omega21]

Update:

South Africa put the use of the AstraZeneca Vaccine on hold.

The South African strain also already has a foothold in Tirol, Austria, and has triggered talks of basically cutting off the region.

If this is true and the mutation spreads, then we can kiss our vaccination plans goodbye.

South Africa has suspended plans to inoculate its front-line health care workers with the AstraZeneca vaccine after a small clinical trial suggested that it isn't effective in preventing mild to moderate illness from the variant dominant in the country

https://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory/astrazeneca-vaccine-tweaked-fight-africa-variant-75739318

[Middle-aged Europe]

I don't have any doubt that the EU made serious errors in planning their vaccination campaign, which were probably also the result of unadressed structural deficits.

I wouldn't necessarily count not ordering Sputnik V dosages during last summer among them though. You don't order a vaccine where - at least at that time - serious and multiple doubts about its viability exists. That too could have been considered an irresponsible decision.

And the US, the UK, or Israel certainly did reasonably well so far in vaccinating their own populations without having ordered any of the Russian vaccine for themselves at any point.

I mean my view of Sputnik V has also evolved over the last few months. Last fall, with the information I had at that time, that stuff seemed a bit fishy to me too. But by now, additional research has indicated that it might actually be quite good.

But like I said, it's probably all a result of "they didn't trust us, we didn't trust them".

The US and the UK have their own vaccines, and as a result, get priority.

The Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine was co-developed by an American and a German company, the latter of which is producing the vaccine at sites in Germany. In that sense the European Union has also its "own" vaccine, or at least Germany does. I think you just essentially argued that the EU made an entirely correct decision - at least at that time - in not trying to obtain Sputnik V earlier.

Israel doesn't but has a very deep relationship with the US, and a small population, putting them at the front of the line.

Despite that, on November 12th, 2020, basically 3 months earlier:

Israel in talks with Russia for Sputnik V COVID-19 vaccine

Hadassah confirms Israel to receive Russia's 92% effective COVID vaccine

Basically a great example for my point. Backup, backup, and more backup. Even though they didn't need it in the end because they received plenty of Pfizer doses, they planned for alternatives. Something which should be common sense considering the non-existent cost and the extreme consequences of actually not having a backup.

As for the last part you mentioned, I most definitely agree. But that is no excuse for our leaders not to have secured at least 5+ vaccine sources for the EU already.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-israel-russia/israel-in-talks-with-russia-over-sputnik-v-covid-19-vaccine-pm-says-idUKKBN27W29J

https://www.jpost.com/breaking-news/russias-sputnik-v-covid-19-vaccine-candidate-92-percent-effective-study-shows-648740

So, your strategy would be - just to be on the safe side - to buy any vaccine that is possibly available? There's only one problem I see... I don't think there's any country in the world that actually did that so far. Not even Israel, since I don't believe that the Israelis tried to obtain any of the Chinese or Indian vaccines. Israel bought dosages from Pfizer, AstraZeneca, and Moderna. And you posted links that they negotiated with the Russsians the option to buy their vaccine as well. That's three, possibly four vaccines. Not more than five.

And that's maybe for good reason. If everybody tries to buy as many vaccines as possible as fast as possible you end up with a situation where few have more than they need and some end up with nothing. And you can't end a global pandemic when some have no vaccines, because that means some infection hotspots will always remain in the world. And that's a phenomenon that would manifest itself in an even severer form when the EU tries as opposed to a rather small country as Israel.

That being said, the EU did of course order not enough dosages for itself in the end. That doesn't mean the exact opposite of it would have been the correct course of action here. The correct course of action IMO would have been to order enough dosages to maintain a vaccination campaign that is roughly on par with the US and the UK. And for that it doesn't really matter whether you have enough dosages of a single vaccine or one fifth of enough dosages of five vaccines. And that's where the EU actually failed, in securing enough dosages and not in securing enough types of vaccines. Just like the US or the UK don't need Sputnik V because they ordered sufficient dosages of other vaccines, the EU also should have ordered a sufficient number of dosages, be it from Germany, the UK, Russia, or the Moon.

I can understand the frustration of the lackluster speed of the European vaccination campaign. But I just don't see it as much of a realistic scenario that representatives of the EU would have said to each other six months ago: "Hey, wait minute, what if we're so incompetent that we just made a tremendous mistake and ordered less dosages than neccessary for a truly speedy vaccination campaign? Shouldn't we also try to obtain dosages of that Russian vaccine where everybody said the available data raises serious question whether it is even effective, just to be on the safe side?"

But if it had happened, I guess some over EU representative would have then intervened and said: "Wait a second, if we're so incompetent that we made a tremendous mistake and just ordered less dosages than neccessary for a truly speedy vaccination campaign why don't we re-check the numbers and order additional dosages of the vaccines we already opted for instead of that Russian vaccine where everybody said the available data raises serious question whether it is even effective?"

[Omega21]

snip

Sorry for not elaborating earlier before you made such a detailed post. My problem is the timetable of delivery. The EU does not have a total order problem, we have already ordered plenty.

The problem is the shipments are being delayed (you probably heard about it in the news) and we are getting the vaccines very slowly.

Austria expects 1 Million Pfizer doses in the first quarter, but we will very likely miss even that mark. Compared to Serbia, where 1 Million Sinofarm doses were delivered on one single day on one single airplane 23 days ago. So, by the time we get that million, the Chinese could have delivered at least 2x times more. Same story with the Russian one. Their vaccine uses a century-old method of immunization, so that's probably also a plus in terms of safety.

That's why diversity is key. If one or two have delivery issues, no worries, we have 3 more coming in on time and according to schedule.

Now, add on that the fact that AstraZeneca is showing issues with its effectiveness against mutations, and many EU countries have safety concerns about older people getting it, means we could even be left dry on that front as well.

The name of the game is speed, not the total amount, the second not being a problem anywhere, because everyone will get enough at some point.

TLDR; The EU is a huge block with a huge population, and it is not humanly possible for 2 or even 3 companies to deliver a large amount quickly and efficiently. Pfizer cannot simply produce enough to send us more doses faster, it's not possible to scale so much so fast. That's why we should have gotten at least 5, as we could maximize the amount we get per month in total, thereby shortening the pandemic.

[Middle-aged Europe]

snip

Sorry for not elaborating earlier before you made such a detailed post. My problem is the timetable of delivery. The EU does not have a total order problem, we have already ordered plenty.

The problem is the shipments are being delayed (you probably heard about it in the news) and we are getting the vaccines very slowly.

Austria expects 1 Million Pfizer doses in the first quarter, but we will very likely miss even that mark. Compared to Serbia, where 1 Million Sinofarm doses were delivered on one single day on one single airplane 23 days ago. So, by the time we get that million, the Chinese could have delivered at least 2x times more. Same story with the Russian one. Their vaccine uses a century-old method of immunization, so that's probably also a plus in terms of safety.

That's why diversity is key. If one or two have delivery issues, no worries, we have 3 more coming in on time and according to schedule.

Now, add on that the fact that AstraZeneca is showing issues with its effectiveness against mutations, and many EU countries have safety concerns about older people getting it, means we could even be left dry on that front as well.

The name of the game is speed, not the total amount, the second not being a problem anywhere, because everyone will get enough at some point.

Okay, strictly speaking maybe the EU didn't fail to order enough dosages, but they certainly failed them to order them soon enough. Those countries who ordered first also got the first deliveries. Israel was very good in putting in the orders quickly, as did the UAE, or the UK. Which country the vaccines came from didn't really matter that much (aside from BioNTech being a German company,  AstraZeneca is also a British-Swedish one and Sweden happens to be an EU member country after all).

"Diversity" in itself maybe isn't even necessary. It's necessary to order quickly and to order where the most vaccine dosages are available at any given moment. And the EU certainly isn't good in acting quickly, be it when it comes to granting EMA approvals or when it comes to ordering vaccine deliveries.

[FrancoAgo]

EU ordered 200 million doses, with an option for an other 100 million, from Bionthech/Pfizer the 11th November, the 15th December the EU confirmed the option for this 100 million doses.

The 25th November ordered 80 million doses to Moderna with a option for an other 80 million. the 15th December they activate the option.

The 27th August they did the first order to AstraZeneca

The 18th September they optioned to 300 million doses to Sanofi-GSK, pending the EMA authorization

The 7th October they optioned 200+200 milion doses to J&J, pending the EMA authorization

The 19th November 225+180 million to Curevac

they have exploratory talks with an other 2 companies

[Omega21]

EU ordered 200 million doses, with an option for an other 100 million, from Bionthech/Pfizer the 11th November, the 15th December the EU confirmed the option for this 100 million doses.

The 25th November ordered 80 million doses to Moderna with a option for an other 80 million. the 15th December they activate the option.

The 27th August they did the first order to AstraZeneca (? ? ? ? ? ?) Much less effective against mutations, huge safety concerns over the elderly, multiple EU members currently not recommending use for those over 55 - vaccination with it already put on hold in South Africa

The 18th September they optioned to 300 million doses to Sanofi-GSK, pending the EMA authorization - Not coming soon, delayed
https://www.fiercebiotech.com/biotech/weak-clinical-data-force-sanofi-gsk-to-delay-covid-19-vaccine

The 7th October they optioned 200+200 milion doses to J&J, pending the EMA authorization - Best case scenario is delivery of first doses in April, so terribly slow.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-vaccine-eu-johnson/jj-covid-19-vaccine-could-be-available-in-europe-in-april-source-idUSKBN29I1EM

The 19th November 225+180 million to Curevac - Not coming soon

they have exploratory talks with an other 2 companies

Just so people know where we're at.

All in all, we dismissed basically all non-European/American manufacturers, even though they've been mass-producing for months, and were the first ones with a working product. Instead, we bet on various companies close to home, even though they were many many months behind compared to Sputnik and Sinofarm.

Hate to say it, but Orban was right on this one.

Okay, strictly speaking maybe the EU didn't fail to order enough dosages, but they certainly failed them to order them soon enough. Those countries who ordered first also got the first deliveries. Israel was very good in putting in the orders quickly, as did the UAE, or the UK. Which country the vaccines came from didn't really matter that much (aside from BioNTech being a German company,  AstraZeneca is also a British-Swedish one and Sweden happens to be an EU member country after all).

"Diversity" in itself maybe isn't even necessary. It's necessary to order quickly and to order where the most vaccine dosages are available at any given moment. And the EU certainly isn't good in acting quickly, be it when it comes to granting EMA approvals or when it comes to ordering vaccine deliveries.

Exactly my point!

AFAIK, Sinofarm and Sputnik are the ones that can deliver the most dosages the quickest. This is not surprising, as the Russians were the first ones to even make a vaccine, thus getting a head start on preparing the manufacturing process. On top of that, we were all ordering from the same companies, Pfizer, Moderna etc., meaning the total supply was spread very thin across the dozens of clients. On the other hand, Russia literally had almost no buyers until recently, so we could have easily gotten a huge share of their total available dosage and production capacity.

Now, it's a different story. Dozens of countries have already put in orders for Sputnik, meaning we're nowhere near first in line.

[Tender Branson]

The Austrian economy will likely drop by 12-15% in Q1 vs. Q1 2020.

This could be the worst result in the EU, after having the 2nd-worst decline in Q4 (behind Spain) already.

[Mike88]

Portugal update: New cases continue to drop, with today being reported new 2,583 cases. However, new deaths continue at very high values, about 200 per day. Hospitalizations and patients in ICUs are also dropping considerably. We'll see if this trend continues during the week.

Also, the Portugal-Spain border will continue close until March 1st, and the current lockdown will probably only be lifted during mid March or at the end of March.

[Meclazine for Israel]

Muslim women are finding greater acceptance in society thanks to the COVID-19 pandemic:

https://theconversation.com/muslim-women-who-cover-their-faces-find-greater-acceptance-among-coronavirus-masks-nobody-is-giving-me-dirty-looks-136021

One positive.