On: EU preparing legal case against AstraZeneca over v...

[jpxw]

In my opinion, the media and European politicians are responsible for this vaccine skepticism. You reap what you sow.

The politicians banned the vaccine despite there not being scientific evidence to suggest that was a reasonable choice. The media in Europe hyped this up massively.

In the UK, neither of these things happened, and despite there being some degree of skepticism, the vast majority of people are still willing to have the AZ jab.

[throwaway10110 → jpxw]

Under 30s in UK are not recommended AZ jab

Its same in other countries ranging from no restriction to restriction being to anything up to under 60s

not recommended is not same as "banned" stop reading UK tabloids.

[jpxw → throwaway10110]

Hang on, I don’t think it’s “not recommended” to under 30s. I think under 30s are just given the choice of an alternative vaccine, if they’d like it.

In many EU countries, the vaccine was banned for large segments of the population for extended periods of time.

[Sosh101 → jpxw]

> In many EU countries, the vaccine was banned for large segments of the population for extended periods of time.

Also happened in Philippines, Indonesia, Thailand, Norway, Iceland, and some African countries.

[jpxw → Sosh101]

Yes, and it was just as incorrect/unscientific in those places too, but we’re discussing the EU here.

[Sosh101 → jpxw]

> but we’re discussing the EU here.

Yes I know. You seem to be insinuating that it's all the EUs fault, and so I wanted to provide a bit of perspective.

[rsynnott → jpxw]

Supply of AZ is so limited in the EU that the EU can afford to be more conservative with recommendations; it's not like de facto restricting AZ to 60-75 (common in European countries) actually slows down vaccination, because there isn't enough AZ available to vaccinate that age group anyway; even if all the AZ is dedicated to it it some of that cohort end up getting Pfizer.