On 28 February this NY Times piece by @SharonLNYT:
"The initial 3.9 million [J&J] doses were manufactured at its factory in the Netherlands; officials have said the rest of the doses were expected to come from its Baltimore plant." (that's Emergent)
That would match what was known EU side at the time - just under 1m doses have gone from EU to US since the Transparency Mechanism was introduced 31 January (and then just under 3m before 31 Jan)
Then the Emergent plant in Baltimore was hit by a series of problems...
And then Spiegel journalist @ClausHecking directs me to this piece by The Street that states
"no vaccine manufactured at the plant [Emergent] has been distributed for use in the U.S."
8m doses administered
17.6m doses delivered (so 9.6m delivered and not administered)
Even if that 9.6m is from Emergent (and hence cannot be used), that *still* leaves an unexplained shortfall of 4m doses
In other words: we *know* just under 4m doses went from the EU to the US from the @SharonLNYT piece, and we know 8m were administered, so where did the rest come from?
There are a few plausible explanations...
1) The NY Times story somehow has the wrong statistic, and exports from EU are much higher than thought - *but* all these exports were pre-31 Jan - but is >7m exported pre-31 Jan conceivable?
2) There have been more exports since 31 Jan than the Commission was aware of, but as all exports are covered by the mechanism is this possible? Even export of ingredients. The mechanism isn't just for finished vaccine...
3) J&J has somehow been using doses from the Emergent plant before the problems were found there, and The Street is wrong about no doses from there being used
4) There's manufacturing somewhere other than Baltimore and Leiden
tl;dr: the worst of 🇪🇺's supply woes are behind it now...
1/11
22-29 January was really the low point
22 Jan: AZ scaled back its delivery forecast to the EU for Q1 from 100m to 31m
29 Jan: von der Leyen caused all the controversy by including reference to Art 16 NI Protocol in the transparency mechanism
2/11
But that transparency mechanism was when it all began to turn. For it allowed the EU to explain what vaccines were going where - and also highlight how much of UK's early vaccine success was based on exports from the EU
So now the European Commission *is* taking AstraZeneca to court, I presume all the EU-sceptics who said the Commission will never dare will eat their words?
"Have you seen that Express is rebroadcasting one of your Euronews interviews?" @RobHarrison_EU asked me earlier
"What?" I replied
And so they are... here I am saying there is "fear in Brussels at the moment" in a clip on the Daily Express site
A 🧵 on fake news
The story is titled "Brussels chaos: UK tells EU it's all set for WTO rules as Australia deal gives huge boost" and is dated yesterday, Saturday 24 April
I have never even spoken to Euronews about the EU-Australia trade deal
Listening to BBC Radio 4 Briefing Room with @DAaronovitch explaining the German Grüne and why Baerbock is Chancellor candidate. It interviews @fazbub and @chantalS_T. It has some interesting background, but I'm not sure it really explains what's going on
It makes the case the rise of the Grüne was a sort of counterweight to the rise of the AfD in 2015-2017. That's not really right I think. The programme doesn't really explain the headaches of other parties that help the Grüne.
Also I am not sure you can understand what the Grüne could do without asking where they'd manage to get agreement with coalition partners.
@SophiaBesch talking on foreign policy at the end of the programme is the clearest of the speakers.