Astrazeneca vaccine suspended..... Not proven to be linked to the jab yet, but investigations are ongoing *title edited by GNHQ*

Casdon

I understood the member states were temporarily suspending use pending the meeting today by EMA suziewoosie, not that the individual states have pronounced it is unsafe. It’s a precautionary measure.
If anybody is able to explain the relationship between them and the WHO I’d be grateful, because I thought the WHO was the senior organisation?

My understanding is that individual member states made their own decisions. As for WHO I don’t think it’s senior in any sense related to decision making of individual governments. They are all sovereign ( despite what we are told?)

Casdon

I understood the member states were temporarily suspending use pending the meeting today by EMA suziewoosie, not that the individual states have pronounced it is unsafe. It’s a precautionary measure.
If anybody is able to explain the relationship between them and the WHO I’d be grateful, because I thought the WHO was the senior organisation?

I was under the impression that the EMA meeting today was to evaluate all evidence/studies regarding AZ vaccine.

I have just checked online and the EMA are still saying that AZ is safe.

This might help

‘The World Health Organization (WHO) is a specialized agency of the United Nations responsible for international public health. The WHO Constitution, which establishes the agency's governing structure and principles, states its main objective as "the attainment by all peoples of the highest possible level of health". It is headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland, with six semi-autonomous regional offices and 150 field offices worldwide.

The WHO was established by constitution on 7 April 1948, which is commemorated as World Health Day. The first meeting of the World Health Assembly (WHA), the agency's governing body, took place on 24 July 1948. The WHO incorporated the assets, personnel, and duties of the League of Nations' Health Organisation and the Office International d'Hygiène Publique, including the International Classification of Diseases (ICD). Its work began in earnest in 1951 following a significant infusion of financial and technical resources.

The WHO's broad mandate includes advocating for universal healthcare, monitoring public health risks, coordinating responses to health emergencies, and promoting human health and well being. It provides technical assistance to countries, sets international health standards and guidelines, and collects data on global health issues through the World Health Survey. Its flagship publication, the World Health Report, provides expert assessments of global health topics and health statistics on all nations. The WHO also serves as a forum for summits and discussions on health issues.’

GrannyGravy13

Casdon

I understood the member states were temporarily suspending use pending the meeting today by EMA suziewoosie, not that the individual states have pronounced it is unsafe. It’s a precautionary measure.
If anybody is able to explain the relationship between them and the WHO I’d be grateful, because I thought the WHO was the senior organisation?

I was under the impression that the EMA meeting today was to evaluate all evidence/studies regarding AZ vaccine.

I have just checked online and the EMA are still saying that AZ is safe.

Just stop it ?

suziewoozie you are much quicker than me as I was just about to post the exact same as your WHO information.

(I am off to shower and dress)

I'm sorry, I'm a bit confused. Are we having a sensible conversation about the situation wrt vaccines? Thought I was on the wrong thread

Anyway I got the name wrong, EMA of course, not EMO.

Thanks suziewoosie it was the sovereignty issue which you answered in your 10.42 post that I was interested in, I know what WHO do but not their relationship with other bodies such as EMA.

Alegrias1

I'm sorry, I'm a bit confused. Are we having a sensible conversation about the situation wrt vaccines? Thought I was on the wrong thread

Anyway I got the name wrong, EMA of course, not EMO.

It seems to have strayed into the realms of truth and facts but please don’t fret, normal disorder will be resumed as soon as possible ??

Just to continue off topic for a moment to answer my personal comment to Alegrias.
There are many posters of extreme views for whom I have never had any respect and therefore largely ignore. You, however, have most often been calm, intelligent and measured in your views and arguments. I always enjoy your posts and have learnt a few things along the way, even though mostly opposed to my own views.
I was just saddened at what appeared to be a bit of an anti English dig from a poster I have respected.

LauraNorder

Just to continue off topic for a moment to answer my personal comment to Alegrias.
There are many posters of extreme views for whom I have never had any respect and therefore largely ignore. You, however, have most often been calm, intelligent and measured in your views and arguments. I always enjoy your posts and have learnt a few things along the way, even though mostly opposed to my own views.
I was just saddened at what appeared to be a bit of an anti English dig from a poster I have respected.

And yet you appear not to have passed judgement on the anti- Australian jibe.

It seems to have strayed into the realms of truth and facts but please don’t fret, normal disorder will be resumed as soon as possible

Best comment I've seen all week.

Yes Suziewoozie, I repeat, I largely ignore posts not worthy of respect.

I've not read all this thread but just checked back to see the 'anti-English' comment.
It's about distant history - 13th century, as was explained. Why take offence at that?

LauraNorder

Yes Suziewoozie, I repeat, I largely ignore posts not worthy of respect.

So making an unpleasant comment to a poster you don’t respect is perfectly acceptable? A sort of pecking order of whom it’s fine to insult, demean, rubbish and others worthy of being defended? Hummmm

FarNorth

I've not read all this thread but just checked back to see the 'anti-English' comment.
It's about distant history - 13th century, as was explained. Why take offence at that?

Exactly

Laura I actually felt I was quite restrained. A conversation was started about Flodden, I have no idea why but anyone who knows the history of that battle might have some inkling of how Scots who know something about it feel about it. That we lost a whole generation of Scottish nobles and their followers, that the king and 10,000 others were killed. It was a long time ago so I guess that's why people think it might be OK to use it as a way of denigrating another poster's opinions.

Anyway, like I said, one of the reasons for the Auld Alliance (which pre-dates Flodden by 230 years, incidentally) was to give the English pause and make them think twice about invading Scotland. Hence, make them nervous. It seems we can say the French have always been our enemies but not that the English needed something to stop them invading Scotland.

Alegrias your comment was ‘just making the English nervous was reward enough’,
I consider that an anti English comment and was offended.
Now there’s a bit of a pile on so I’m out.

Fair enough.

With all seriousness, I am rarely offended on here. Annoyed, but rarely offended. But if I was a French person who was being told that they had always been the enemies of Britain and that was why this whole vaccine thing was going on, I might be offended then.

I hope we can continue conversations about other topics Laura.

LauraNorder

Alegrias your comment was ‘just making the English nervous was reward enough’,
I consider that an anti English comment and was offended.
Now there’s a bit of a pile on so I’m out.

I don’t understand your comment about a pile on.

Indeed Alegrias.

Oh what a surprise, the European Medicines Agency have approved AZ now.

Jaxjacky

Oh what a surprise, the European Medicines Agency have approved AZ now.

It’s not a surprise - they never un-approved it in the first place. Today’s announcement was their statement on the blood clotting issue. It really isn’t on to post something that is so completely wrong you know. It was individual countries that decided to pause it.

But nonetheless several countries did suspend use pending the outcome today didn’t they - it says on the BBC News that Italy are starting to vaccinate again tomorrow, which is good news as they are in a really serious situation at the moment.

Casdon

But nonetheless several countries did suspend use pending the outcome today didn’t they - it says on the BBC News that Italy are starting to vaccinate again tomorrow, which is good news as they are in a really serious situation at the moment.

Yes I’m fully aware of that- that is not at all relevant to the points I made. You can’t challenge what I posted by putting forward an irrelevant point.

On a personal level, I’m so pleased that all countries who ‘paused’ will now look to make up lost time.

I have friends in Spain and Greece who are desperate (and indeed despairing at their Governments/EU cockups) for these jabs.