Reply With QuoteYes we should - Should also be very proud of the Oxford vaccine.
| + Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
first country in world to approve Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine for widespread use
Yes we should - Should also be very proud of the Oxford vaccine.
I know there was some doubt at the time when the government threw millions at this with no guarantee of even getting vaccine anywhere , was a gamble, but a good one.Originally Posted by Freitag 4.17
Yes we should be very proud, though I think most of us are as likely to get a vaccine anytime soon as we are to stroll into a shop, buy a ps5 and have a pint on the way home in the next six months
We don't know the answer as yet. Germany is taking a more cautious approach and demanding more data about the vaccine. Only time will tell....
Of course it's fantastic the way the government has backed the various vaccines and committed huge resources for their purchase. However, there will be no such praise on here from the majority of forum members.
But I fear it is only a matter of time before hindsight kicks in leading to criticisms about the amount of money spent on committing to the purchase of vaccines such as the Pfizer vaccine which costs several times more than the yet to be approved Oxford vaccine.
They spend millions on nuclear weapons and make money selling arms that the saudis use to butcher Yemeni people too
Should we be proud of that ?
The MHRA (UK) has acted on partial data to speed up the approval process and the EMA (EU) has chosen to await analysis of all available data in order to instill the greatest degree of public confidence in a mass vaccination campaign. Whether you think the approach the UK has chosen is the right one is up to you.
We should of course be very grateful to the vaccine developers at the German company BioNTech whose work, part-funded by the EU and further developed in conjunction with the US company Pfizer, has brought us to where we are today.
It's a bit of a strange question.
I think your argument is that the UK government deserves some credit for pre-ordering speculative vaccines. I think that is right.
I am not sure about being proud that we are the first country to authorise its use. Why, because our regulatory authorities are the swiftest off the mark since Pfizer announced their trial results or because we feel the need to be first either because of the particular challenges around Covid that our country faces or because of other political pressures?
You know the answer to that, so why are you trying to derail the thread?
Clearly you didn't see the press conference by the MHRA when they explained how they assessed the vaccine and worked with the pharmaceutical companies at each stage of the process which explained why they were able to reach their conclusion so swiftly.
Is this a benefit of Brexit, has it already been awarded the CE Mark?
Would a Labour Government employ people in the weapons and aeronautical industries and would the Unions would roll over if a future Labour Government decided to cease selling arms as they have done in the past? Of course not.
No. But that wasn’t the question.
No it isn't. We are still under European Law until 1st January and as the head of MHRA said earlier we were able to do this under European law. Other EU countries could have done the same had they wished. Unfortunately, Matt Hancock, who as Health Secretary knows full well that this is the case, decides to spread misinformation in the Commons today. The tweet from Rees-Mogg is in the same category.
No
Yes exactly. Hancock and Rees-Mogg, in their desperation, tried to claim this as a 'Brexit bonus'. That was shown to be false, and even number 10 distanced themselves from it.
None of that should detract from the brilliant job our scientists have done to get to this point, working alongside their international colleagues.
The European Medicines Agency could wait until the end of month before convening to discuss.
They had to take a punt on every vaccine that was being developed. What if they'd backed one, and it turned out to be crap? They had to put money into all of them.
There are 150 candidate vaccines in development around the World. The UK has pre ordered 7. I thought there would be some who would knock the achievement but expected people to get their facts right. Clearly I was wrong.
The question is about the approval thereof.
What happens if we start using the vaccine next week and then the europeans find issues with it?
That seems a strange thing to be proud of.
Jacob Rees-Mogg
@Jacob_Rees_Mogg
We could only approve this vaccine so quickly because we have left the EU. Last month we changed the regulations so a vaccine did not need EU approval which is slower.
Whether you are left wing, right wing or (like me) somewhere in the middle, the above is a lie. It is a lie made for political purposes, and - I think - is an insult to the brilliance of our scientists who work co-operatively with global colleagues.
So you’re belief is that a vaccine invented in the EU and developed in conjunction with the US is a triumph for the UK because we’ve decided to use their vaccine before them.
Regulatory authorities like the MHRA, EMA and FDA will each come to their own decisions about how best to protect their citizens balancing the need for speed against the need to evaluate all the data and instill the greatest confidence in the population prior to a mass vaccination programme. To this aim MHRA are satisfied with the data they’ve got and EMA want more data and further analysis, either approach will have merits and potential detractions.
Posting Permissions