Pic: Dr. Christian Drosten
March 8th 2021
When all is said and done, the single most important task that the EU has ever faced is that of securing vaccines for its people in the face of a global pandemic. Whether one uses human or economic terms, no other challenge since the treaty of Rome even gets close. As of week eight of 2021, well over half a million of its citizens have died – death rates not seen WW2.
With centralised control and purchasing, a territory free of borders and the world's best infrastructure, this is the one place you'd put your hypothetical money on to get things done, and get them done right. The distribution of the vaccine is, after all, a question of management and logistics, and with the Germans in charge, it's a sure thing, isn't it?
So why has the enterprise so far been an abject failure?
Having been left behind by the progress made in Britain, any blame or criticism had to be deflected, so they accused Edward Jenner's homeland of 'rushing' approval. The European Medicines Agency stated their approval process was 'safer' as it was based on more evidence and that they considered the MHRA's approval to be 'problematic'.
The clear message to the average European was that the British process had a poor evidential base and was not safe. Cue President Macron who said “We have to be realistic: the real problem with the AstraZeneca vaccine is that it doesn’t work in the way we expected to.” “We have very little information … but all the indications today are that it is quasi-ineffective for those over 65 years old “.
This was false information (what we used to call 'lies') obviously designed to dampen demand and to characterise the progress made across La Manche as reckless. Oxford University, AstraZeneca and the MHRA fired back immediately. Dr June Raine, CE of the MHRA said “Current evidence does not suggest any lack of protection against Covid-19 in people aged 65 or over. The data we have shown that the vaccine produces a strong immune response in the over-65s.”
France's Europe Minister, Clement Beaune, accused the UK of 'taking a lot of risks' by introducing the 12 week gap between doses, and Angela Merkel joined the fray by saying that she wouldn't take the AV vaccine.
Following such public statements from political leaders, it would be a brave nation indeed that took what was now perceived as a risk by approving the vaccine for all age groups. Germany, Austria, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Netherlands, Spain and Poland then recommend it only for people under 65, and Italy and Belgium for those under 55. The man on the Brussels, Budapest or Berlin Autobus could hardly be blamed for thinking that the Oxford A/Z vaccine was somehow sub standard. All this, of course, while the EU picked a very public row with Astra Zeneca over deliveries. Deliveries of a vaccine they regarded as inferior.
​
About Face.
Then on March 2nd, the French revised their stance and announced that they had approved the vaccine, but couldn't quite stretch to all age groups. Their health minister just increased the upper age limit from 65 to 74 – i.e. they weren't altogether mistaken the first time. In the face of overwhelming evidence, Germany then revised its position and not only declared the AZ vaccine as safe and effective for all age groups, but that delaying the second dose by 12 weeks as the British had done increased its efficacy.
Ursula von der Leyen has now said that she would have no hesitation in taking the AZ vaccine. The cynical among us might think that is hardly a surprise. Throughout this, the European scientific establishment has taken a far less critical stance. Dr Christian Drosten, an internationally renowned virologist and one of the scientists who first identified the SARS virus, said that the concerns over the AZ vaccine were misplaced, and that they could be used 'to achieve a breakthrough in pandemic protection' for Germany. Such is the damage to perceptions caused by the EU leadership, he has been widely vilified, received death threats and even been compared to Mengele.
In just a few days, we have come from a complete reversal of what I regard as a transparently political decision to denigrate the vaccine to the stage where they are now somewhat jealous of their stocks. The row with AZ aside, they have blocked shipments to Australia and are turning to the US asking for them to allow the export of millions of doses to Europe. Quite how both positions can be put forward in the same 48-hour period escapes me. To prevent a company from exporting vaccines is as closed and isolationist as can be imagined.
The EU leadership – (notably not the European scientific community – in fact in outright defiance of one of its figureheads) have accused the British of cutting corners and rushing things through, and in so doing poured fuel on the anti-vax fire. They made a spectacular mess of procurement putting themselves way down the queue. In a demonstration of breathtaking incompetence and bureaucracy (insisting on diversity audits before awarding contracts is just one example) they simply held everything up for months before realising their position and then turning on AstraZeneca because they couldn't jump the queue. This was topped off by a world-class volte-face as they tried to impose a hard border in Ireland.
The result? The EU leadership has not just put its citizens way down the queue, but has also managed to convince tens of millions that the AZ vaccine is second-class, to the point that it is being refused en-masse. The British made its real-world data freely and immediately available to its European allies in order that it could inform decision making and expedite roll-out. Instead, they used it to protect their incompetence.