E
EddieM
AZ are simply sticking to their contractual terms. It is unfortunate for the EU that those obligations aren't as strict as the UK's contract it's a simple as that.
Precisely. In fact UK is importing vaccines.The reason the EU went as a group was to avoid their members squabbling for the various vaccines. An EU spokesperson mentioned that there is some ill feeling in Germany as they are exporting vaccine even to the UK. It's seems that the UK Az plant isn't exporting at all but no definite proof either way.
Yes, it's unfortunate for the EU that UK used contracts that ensured UK was provided, by the limited production first, and is stockpiling vaccines, and has not exported any vaccines.AZ are simply sticking to their contractual terms. It is unfortunate for the EU that those obligations aren't as strict as the UK's contract it's a simple as that.
You deleted your comment because your new position contrasted with that comment.
Discuss it with Dangee, you're both inept at changing your argument.I'm not going to say any more on the matter
It basically shows that the EU are about as agile as a baby panda when it comes to acting swiftly.
They’ve also shown there true colours in there reactions. Nasty & snidey
Yes, it's unfortunate for the EU that UK used contracts that ensured UK was provided, by the limited production first, and is stockpiling vaccines, and has not exported any vaccines.
In fact UK is taking imports of the vaccines from India!
https://www.politico.eu/article/why-the-uk-doesnt-need-a-coronavirus-vaccine-export-ban/
Discuss it with Dangee, you're both inept at changing your argument.
Perhaps between the two of you, you could fine-tune your strategies.
Is this a deliberately confused comment to avoid deleting it in the future?The UK are using those vaccines supplied though, whereas the EU are not due to various countries within the EU providing false and conflicting information.
I'm sure the UK will have used the same binding contract with other suppliers to ensure UK's requirement is met first. Including export of vaccines from EU, even thought the EU contract was falling woefully short.Also note it is not only AZ that have failed to deliver the vaccine quantities requested.
They're still export of vaccines form EU to UK.The vaccine deliveries from the EU to UK have not been AZ vaccines, they have been Pfizer.
And no vaccine, not one has been exported from UK. In fact UK has stated that it will not export vaccines until its own requirement has been met.The majority of the 34 million doses that have been exported around the world from the EU are Pfizer jabs, which is only manufactured in the EU (the US has there own production site)
As the article explains, UK does not need a ban because it has other mechanism to restrict the export of vaccines.The UK government haven't forced any blocks to vaccines being exported. And we don't know if any vaccines have been exported or not, as the UK government have not made it mandatory to be told if vaccines are leaving out shores. The UK's stance is that it is up to the private companies to decide where the vaccine doses go and is dependent on contracts those companies have made.
As the UK has stated, export of vaccines will only happen when UK's requirement is met.This article is interesting to see where the UK is going and will eventually be exporting millions of doses once production is up and running, and this was decided and the wheels put in motion before the vaccine nationalism argument came about .
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.ft.com/content/662ab296-2aef-4179-907c-5dba5c355d86
Then there's that pathetic excuse for your "blocking export of vaccines around the world".I haven't changed any argument though.. my stance is still the same.
I've explained my actions, have said it was posted in error, and that my removing it was done before I realised it had been quoted.
I haven't denied doing it, and have stated my stance is still the same.
Your response imo didn't really prove to me to be a winning argument.
You are trying to make an innocent mistake into something that it wasn't.
I apologise if you feel I have tried to missle the general public, but I can assure you if I was to do so, it wouldn't be so obvious to delete something that had been quoted.
(PCR tests give 80 or 90% false positives)
Isn't it odd that up until the vaccine roll out all old people in nursing homes who died after having had a positive test for covid (PCR tests give 80 or 90% false positives), were counted as covid deaths, no matter how many comorbidities they had, or how old they were at the time of death.
But since the vaccine rollout all of the deaths that have happened in nursing homes where the vaccine was given, and there have been very many in clusters all over the world, have been due to new covid outbreaks, and nothing whatsoever to do with the vaccine itself, nothing at all perish the thought.
Or they have happened because they are dealing wth very old people with lots of comorbidities, and it is only to be expected that these people will die at their age.