An objective viewpoint would be that...

it was initially thought that of all the candidate vaccinates, only a small proportion would be effective. Efficacy of 60% was considered decent.

Now our current situation is that: BioNtech works, Moderna works, Astrazeneca works really well, Sputnik seems to work, Sinopharm works. Janssen sort of works if they can actually make any of it. The only clear failed vaccine was Sanofi.

Which vaccine did the EU bet on? Sanofi. Biontech is expensive, Sanofi cheap. Lets order the same Euro value of both vaccines. Franco-German unity. Spend the same on each. Then Sanofi turns out to be Merde. Then what do they do?

What are the fiscal implications? The UK vaccine approach looks very much like it more than covers the long term costs of brexit. Conversely, the EU balls up has cost them proportionally more than brexit cost the UK.

This is even before we get on to the cost of vaccine refusal - well played Macron :-/

How would our outlook be if it had ended up being AstraZeneca that didnt work and Sanofi did work? The UK struck lucky and the EU gamble didnt work out. Nobody should be getting too pissy IMHO.

Posted By: Timmy_Goat, Mar 10, 22:03:42