I think what this shows is a different regulatory mindset.. the German and French regulators wanted unequivocal proof AZ worked well enough in older age groups before they authorised it..
https://twitter.com/nickgutteridge/status/1366696630599180290
the MHRA adopted a more speculative approach and looked at the balance of risks.. was it reasonable based on the evidence they had to assume efficacy in older age groups.. they concluded as JVT said yesterday that it was...
they could also weigh that against the costs of regulator hesitancy .. far fewer people would be vaccinated if they delayed authorisation of AZ ... and good sruveillance meant that they could pick up if their assumption was confounded..
ditto with the decision on the delayed second dose approach.. they assumed that given the very high levels of infection in the UK some protection for more people was to be preferred to more (potential) protection for some.. again monitoring. v important..
but Germany and France have undermined their messaging by a game of Chinese whispers which has converted a message of not yet proven to be effective (fair at the time) to ineffective/ dubious effectiveness.. that gives a lot of ground to recover ..
esp when set against the background of unused stockpiles and criticism for low vaccination rates.. interesting to see the extent to which they can convince people the AZ vaccine is OK...
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
