Faced with the precaution of Europeans, the British dailies advance the scientific data

The list of countries that have chosen to suspend the use of the anticovid vaccine developed by the Swedish-British pharmaceutical group AstraZeneca continues to grow. Despite the growing threat of a third epidemic wave, seven European Union states, including France, Germany and Italy, decided on Monday March 15 to stop the use of these doses, worried about possible side effects such as difficulty in coagulating or the formation of blood clots, joined by Sweden on Tuesday. A measure taken in the name of the precautionary principle, pending an opinion from the European Medicines Agency (EMA), Thursday.

In the United Kingdom, where the vaccine has been widely administered – according to the British Ministry of Health, as of February 28, nearly 10 million people had received a first dose – the press does not fail to react to this coup. temporary halt, which affects the global vaccination campaign.

“Should the British be worried? “, interrogates The Telegraph. “The numbers suggest not”, answers the conservative daily from the outset, before churning out the figures. According to AstraZeneca, some 17 million doses of its vaccines have been administered worldwide. “This means that the risk of suffering from DVT [thrombose veineuse profonde] or an EP [embolie pulmonaire] after vaccination is 37 out of 17 million, or about one in 460,000 “, argues the newspaper.

“At the current prevalence rate, in a population of 17 million, we can expect 326 cases to appear naturally”

Now, he insists, “ At the current prevalence rate, in a population of 17 million, we can expect 326 cases to appear naturally in the week following vaccination, so that the figure of 37 begins to appear very low ”. Especially since DVT and PE are more frequent in priority populations for vaccination, that is to say the elderly and those suffering from comorbidities, he continues.

“Most scientists roll their eyes »Faced with the decision of certain European governments, abounds in the center-left daily The Guardian. Of course, “Cases of blood clots exist, but they are not more frequent in individuals vaccinated against Covid, according to the data available to date”. International regulatory authorities, including the World Health Organization (WHO) and the AEM, also assert that at this stage, there is no evidence that the vaccine is the cause of the complications observed.

“Really harm the objective”

In the columns of Telegraph, the D^r Peter English, former chairman of the Public Health Committee at the British Medical Association, recalls that “When a vaccine is given to millions of people, it is inevitable that certain adverse events, which would have occurred anyway, will occur soon after vaccination”. He regrets this suspension which “May actually undermine the goal of vaccinating enough people to slow the spread of the virus and end the pandemic”.

Asked by the Scottish daily The Scotsman, the P^r Neil Mabbott, chair of immunopathology at the Roslin Institute at the University of Edinburgh, agrees:

“It is not very surprising that we might, by chance, observe a few unlucky individuals who had a coagulation incident shortly after vaccination. “

If he explains that he understands the fears and caution of European countries, he nevertheless invites them to turn their eyes to the United Kingdom: “They will see that these vaccines are remarkably safe. “

The Conservative Journal Times publishes, him, a column of the Prime Minister, Boris Jonhson, praising the merits of the vaccine, developed with the University of Oxford and today “Used worldwide”. Because, says the tenant of 10 Downing Street, “As successful as the British vaccination program is, there is little point in obtaining isolated national immunity”. “We need the whole world to be protected. We need the whole world to have the confidence to open up to trade, travel, vacation and business ”, insists the head of the British government.

“European leaders are now afraid to lead”, argues, for her part, the journalist Anne-Elisabeth Moutet, in another analysis published in The Telegraph.

“Across Europe, the consequences of a dismal delay in the race to roll out the vaccine – and the added embarrassment of being well behind the UK Brexit that we were assured would be drifting without the rest of us – are visible in the polls. “

“Other elements than the evidence”

Do Europeans lack a ” overview “asks the BBC. This is not the first time that EU countries have been cautious about the AstraZeneca vaccine, which was not recommended for people over 65 for a time. However, the effects of this previous decision are still being felt, judges the public broadcaster. “In a rapidly evolving pandemic, where every decision can have major consequences, the precautionary principle can sometimes do more harm than good”, argues the BBC.

For The Guardian, if the scientific arguments do not “Don’t fly” in this case, it is because “Governments, unlike scientific bodies, must take into account other elements than evidence”. “They are concerned about the confidence of the population – in the vaccine, but also in the way ministers are handling these concerns”, details the newspaper, citing in particular the case of France, where “The public has long been suspicious of pharmaceutical companies”.

Another potential factor, according to the title, is the question of supply. “In the UK stocks are plentiful. In Europe, there is none. AstraZeneca has just reduced its proposed deliveries again, to 30 million doses in the first quarter, or about a third of what was initially promised. It is easier to suspend the vaccine in Europe if it is not available in large quantities anyway ”, he sums up, pragmatic.