OPINION: European governments were cautious on AstraZeneca vaccines but they were neither stupid nor ‘political’

OPINION: European governments were cautious on AstraZeneca vaccines but they were neither stupid nor 'political'
Photo: Christophe Stache/AFP
It is the best of decisions and the worst of decisions. Everyone can claim to be right. Everyone is partly wrong, writes John Lichfield on the pausing of the AstraZeneca vaccination campaign across Europe.

The European Medicines Agency handed down its judgement on Thursday. The AstraZeneca vaccine is effective and safe to use. Most European countries which had suspended AZ vaccinations are expected to resume today or in the next couple of days.

But – despite what is being reported by some – the EMA did not dismiss out of hand concerns that AZ shots can lead to blood clotting disorders in perfectly healthy young people.

The agency said that there was indeed evidence of “a small number of cases of rare and unusual but very serious” clotting problems associated with AZ.  Nonetheless, on balance, the EMA said, it had come to a “clear scientific conclusion” that AZ shots were safe to use. The huge benefits far outweighed the tiny risks.

Fair enough. Balance and clarity have been in short supply in this sorry saga until now.

Unfortunately, there is no sign that will change soon.

Were European governments wrong to suspend their AZ roll-out at the start of the week? The pause will undoubtedly have dangerous side-effects on vaccine resistance, and specifically AZ resistance, in European countries.

On the other hand, ploughing ahead regardless of the evidence of rare clotting disorders emerging in several places – in Norway, in Germany, in Austria and in Italy –  might have had an even more calamitous effect on public opinion.

Let us, for once, be fair to governments. They were placed in a very difficult situation. France, for instance, where there were very few AZ side-effects, did not want to suspend an AstraZeneca programme which had just started to take wing.

President Emmanuel Macron was bounced into his decision by a domino-tumble of suspensions imposed by Germany, the Netherlands, Italy and others.

France is the most vaccine-sceptic country in the world. How could Macron say that there was no reason to stop briefly to think when all his neighbours were stopping briefly to think?

READ ALSO How worried should France be about its vaccine-sceptics?

Little of this was reflected in the coverage in the British media. With some honourable exceptions, the consensus view in the UK was that the EU was being “stupid” or seizing on flimsy reasons to attack the AstraZeneca vaccines because a) AZ was British or b) AZ had failed to supply the EU with all its promised doses.

In other words, it was all “political”. In truth, it was the opposite. Politicians in a score of European governments decided, rightly or wrongly, that their political interest – the belatedly accelerating vaccine programme – must briefly give way to medical and legal considerations.

Only Belgium stood up to this trend. The Belgian government said that it would be “irresponsible” to interrupt an AZ vax roll-out which WOULD save thousands of lives because very rare side-effects  MIGHT take a handful of young, healthy lives.

That was a courageous decision by Belgium but I don’t think that it makes the decision taken by the others irresponsible. We live in a time of instant experts and easy answers but sometimes there are no easy answers.

It has been widely asserted in the UK media, and by the UK government, that there is no obvious connection between the AZ vaccine and clotting disorders. It is also asserted that such “thromboses” have actually been less common among the AZ-vaccinated than in the population as a whole.

Neither of these things, it now turns out, are true.

A Norwegian study found on Thursday that there was a clear link between AZ vaccinations and three youngish Norwegians who suffered rare brain thromboses or strokes, one of whom died. On Tuesday, Germany’s health ministry of health said that there had been seven cases of “cerebral venous sinus thrombosis (CVST), including three deaths, among the 1.6m million Germans people who had received an AZ shot. That was three or four times higher than the normal rate.

Science magazine reported that in five countries 13 people aged 20 to 50 had suffered from widespread blood clots, low platelet counts, and internal bleeding. Seven had died. This was “more frequent than would be expected by chance”.

“It’s a very special picture” of symptoms, said Steinar Madsen, medical director of the Norwegian Medicines Agency. “Our leading haematologist said he had never seen anything quite like it.”

I am not trying to start – or re-start – a scare story.

I think vaccination is great. I think the AZ vaccine is wonderful. One week ago I had my first shot in a French doctor’s surgery. It was AstraZeneca. I have a history of blood clotting problems. I have no regrets that I took the shot. I’m looking forward to my second in June.

The EMA and Belgium are right. The need to vaccinate rapidly against Covid is so urgent that, on balance, a small risk of clotting problems is a risk worth taking.

But that’s not so simple a choice as much of the British media – BBC included – would have us believe. Life-death accountancy is not straightforward.

Is it worth risking the lives of few young people who are broadly unthreatened by Covid to protect the lives of tens of thousands of vulnerable older people?

European governments had little choice but to stop to review the evidence. The easiest way to fuel anti-vaccine feeling in France – and probably other EU countries –  is to create the impression that vaccination is a politico-industrial juggernaut which cares nothing  for potential or actual side-effects.

Yes, EU countries are sometimes more risk-averse than Britain.

Yes, the UK has, so far, got away with, even hugely benefitted, from a series of risky short-cuts on vaccines.

Yes, the EU should find a way to make these common health decisions in advance, not after the damage is done.

Yes, President Macron and others were wrong to make baseless accusation against the AZ vaccine in the past.

Yes, the blood-clot scare will cause greater AZ-scepticism in the EU for a while (and then the effect will, hopefully, fade).

But for Britain to shout down understandable caution as “stupid” or “political” or “an EU attack on our vaccine” is foolish and hazardous. 

John Lichfield is the former foreign editor of the UK’s Independent newspaper. He also worked in Brussels covering the EU and spent 20 years as the France correspondent for the newspaper. He now writes opinion & analysis articles for a number of publications including The Local.


Member comments

  1. I read a very long and detailed analysis of the issue with vaccine production and supply, especially as it relates to the AstraZeneca vaccine and the exclusivity clause that the British government inserted into their contract for supply (which is behind a large part of the supply issues into Europe). One comment that was made in that very long chain of discussion that is relevant here is this: Most EU countries take responsibility for the welfare of their citizens, and that demands caution when side effects were reported from this vaccine (as the side effects were statistically higher than expected). The UK government appears to have thrown caution to the wind and is willing to take risks with its population in its drive to get everyone vaccinated.

    You can decide for yourself which approach you prefer…If you think the risk is acceptable…I suspect if you think it is, it will remain acceptable only so long as it is not you or your loved ones that fall victim to that risk…

    1. Hi Rob. I think in reply I would say the view that the UK government has thrown caution to the wind and doesn’t take care of its citizens welfare is inaccurate, indeed very harsh. It was the UK government that financed the development of this vaccine which holds huge distribution advantages over many of the others when it comes to a global vaccination program. Equally, they have pursued strong lock-down measures, even if a week late in the first wave. Surely their strong pro-active vaccination approach including the 12 week vaccination gap (so that more people get protection) fully supports just how much they are caring for public health.
      The debate about this vaccines safety may continue for some time. Of course I understand that potential side-effects should not be ignored – that would be insane. But as at this time there is no proven link with the vaccine; indeed I have read (but not fact-checked) that the risk of clots is lower than that from taking the contraceptive pill. However what is for sure is the risk of hospitalization and death, even amongst the 18-49 year age group, from Covid, is significantly higher without being vaccinated.
      Meanwhile the virus is again out of control leading to further EU lockdowns and further economic hardship which will bring its own repercussions. I noticed Merkel said “everything is based on one principal and that is trust”. I wonder how many trust Sputnik V, a still unauthorised, adenoviral vaccine that may now be sourced from our beloved, trusted Russian friends.
      Terrible times. I hope everyone can receive their jab asap, whichever one is offered.

  2. This vaccine has undergone rigorous trials in the face of a pandemic. It has been authorised by the WHO, the EMA and MHRA and after today’s latest trials, shortly by the FDA. Macro et al should hang their heads in shame.

  3. The EU “governments” have been both “stupid” and “political” sir, and many Europeans will now pay for it with their lives. The worst article I have read during this whole pandemic.

  4. Why don’t the authorities just get on with vaccinating the ‘forgotten’ tranche, and stop this pointless arguing about who’s vaccine it is. All the while its not in somebodies arm its useless.

  5. Astrazeneca apparently changed name: Vaxzevria (previously COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca)
    Why? I guess because too many young died, now people refusing. They hope it is quickly forgotten, in the weeks to come they only mention Vaxzevria, and no association with Astrazeneca, until the same happens………oops. All feels a bit dodgy, like a cover up.

  6. Yes but you are extremely unlikely to end up in hospital or die from Covid – seems like a no brainier

  7. I must comment on your statement that “ most people react quite badly to it “ that is the AZ jab. I live in the UK and know many, many people who have had the vaccine with no side effects other that a sore arm and/or feeling of tiredness.
    I agree in an ideal world we shouldn’t be injecting rapidly developed vaccines into people. However, I think you might have noticed that this not an ideal world and our chances of dying from Covid are massively higher than from a possibly resultant blood cot or any other possible side effect. But ultimately it is a personal decision and I respect people’s decision not to have a vaccine although I really do not understand it !
    Also a comment to the author of the article – the consensus in the UK is not that we think European decision making is stupid or political ( unless you take the “ gutter press “ seriously), we are just bemused by the lack of a clear plan and the constant smoke from various politicians trying to blame others for what has been a very poor vaccination programme from start to finish.

  8. I have to donate to a less priviledged older person in Africa? Can you explain this opinion exactly please, because to me this does not make sense. It is the same as telling a child ‘eat your bread because in Africa children do not have bread’.
    It is the same as ‘this vaccine is safe because the WHO or whoeverr says so. The drug companies do not make statements ‘our vaccine is 100% safe’, they make sure not to be reliable if something goes wrong. And nobody knows at this point in time or it is as safe as anyone wants you to believe. Short term? reasonable safe. Long term? ???? nobody knows.
    Today they say A, tomorrow B, astrazeneca is today so safe that the french goverment does not allow it for under 55, while a week or two ago it was no good in the elderly. Are they crazy? maybe…… maybe they know more than we do………. maybe not crazy. Get a flower pull off the leaves, crazy, not crazy, crazy, not crazy, crazy etc. Time will tell…….

  9. wow, I prefer not to have an injectable stuck in my arm without knowing long term side effects. Have you read the patient leaphley from Astra zeneca? I have even called them. They are unable to explain when feeling naussia is just a commen side effect (more often than 1 in 10 or when you urgently need to call in medical care. The answer is ‘we do not suggest you take this vaccin nor do we say don’t take it. I refuse Astra zeneca, you obviously trust whtever they tell you. First it was useless in the old, now healthy young people dropped dead and voila, France says only for those over 55. They say that because the who or whoever told them it is perfectly safe. I prefer not to have AZ simply because most people react quite badly to it, some say that’s good, extra immunity, I think the reaction is too strong for most people and I think too this might trigger other responses, auto mmune problems later on. The fact that several healthy 20 to 50 year old dropped dead is something I find hard to accept as ‘the price to pay for sociery. Another point is the goverment want everyone vaccinated, if they want that they might give people choice and not threaten ‘if you do not take it now, your turn is last’. Well if they want it that way…… I wait. This strategy might be unwise because I am sort of a super spreader…….. by not changing my mask when I sneeze or cough, not poisoning myself with desinfected gel every time I enter a shop, by touching my mask, by being alife and breathing.

Become a Member to leave a comment.Or login here.