Astra Zeneca: Should Britain Follow Europe?

 Sam Head investigates why most European countries are pausing the use of the Astra Zeneca vaccine and asks whether Britain should follow in their footsteps?

(image: BBC)

Over the past few weeks many countries including Germany, France and Italy have banned the use of AstraZeneca vaccine. The leader of such pun tries have justified their actions on account of the side effects including blood clots. However recently rumours have been circulating that political gain is what really drives the ban of the vaccine. This discussion is what I will be examining. This vaccine is made from a collaboration between the University of Oxford and the British-Swedish company AstraZeneca. Also known as ChAdOxl nCovid-19 the vaccine is a non-replicating viral vector as opposed to the Pfizer BioNTech or moderna vaccine which are both RNA type vaccines. This type of vaccine while creating a weaker immune response than the Pfizer vaccine does not risk the adverse effects of the virus emitting more viral particles during administration. This means that the vaccine cannot give rise to the disease and the unfavourable effects created from viral vector replication are limited to the bare minimum. 

To further understand the debate surrounding the vaccine, first we have to comprehend how it works. The SARS-CoV-2 viral envelope is studded with glycoproteins called antigens which act as a key to gain access to the human cells. In these cells the viral membrane breaks down and its genetic information is released into the nucleus of the cell. It then uses the cell to multiple as it cannot without a host. It does this by injecting its genetic information into the host DNA and the host unwittingly produces more viruses until there is no space left and the cell membrane bursts releasing thousands of viruses which each infect a cell. However these antigens also attract the immune system. The antigens are engulfed by an antigen recognising cell which is connected to T lymphocytes. T lymphocytes are programmed to recognise, respond to and remember any antigen they come across. Sounding the alarm to the immune system then utilising macrophages to engulf pathogens breaking them down into smaller proteins to be destroyed. The T lymphocytes can also activate the B lymphocytes which produce antibodies. These Antibodies bind to the antigens and mark them for destruction.

Furthermore the B lymphocytes can block off the antigens of the virus so it cannot infect any more cells. The vaccine makes use of this immune reaction. Oxford used a modified version of a chimpanzee adenovirus which can enter cells but cannot replicate. The DNA stored inside the adenovirus is inserted into the nucleus, this allows it to be read by the cell and copied into mRNA. Then the cell through protein synthesis begins to manufacture not the virus but its antigens which are identical to COVID-19’s. These can then be recognised by the B and T lymphocytes and recorder and remembered by the T Lymphocyte. This means that if infected with COVID-19 then the immune system can deploy the correct antibodies and the virus will be swiftly dealt with. The booster jab which is optimally given 12 weeks later is used to establish the recording of the antigens specific to the virus. 

Now the factual information about its production has been covered. We can begin to discover the reason for Europe's ban of the vaccine, whether it was from an ethical medical standpoint or perhaps a part of politics concerning Brexit and the EU. Concerning the medical proof concerning the cease in inoculation.  An investigation into the vaccine has begun headed by the European medical agency (EMA). This has commenced due to the numerous accounts of blood clots from patients receiving the vaccine.  The agency has worked closely with AstraZeneca and many experts in the realm of blood disorders along with other health professionals to analyse the data concerning the thromboembolic side effects. However despite this rigorous clinical trailing there appear to be no correlation between blood clots forming and the inoculation of the vaccine. Only 37 out of 17 million had blood clots after receiving the vaccine, most were middle aged where clots are more common, furthermore blood clots aren’t particularly rare in the gernal public anyway. Despite these recordings there has been demand to check further patients. This pause of use has been disputed by the Uk and Canada who are backing the vaccine, claiming there are no vaccines of use in either country that have adverse side effects. Furthermore WHO has claimed that the benefits outweigh the risks of using the vaccine as the pause in use could be detrimental in the containment of the virus and many people will in turn be infected. 

European leaders' reluctance to accept the vaccine, prompted rumours surrounding the validity of ceasing the virus in the first place to appear. Many news articles have been published discussing the political gains European politicians may have gained due to the pause. The distribution of the AstraZeneca vaccine to Europe was a laborious task. Discussions between Europe and the U.K. were a hassle due the strained relationship that occurred because of Brexit. As a result if any issues were exhibited with the vaccine politicians in Europe such as German Health Minister Jeans Spahn would exploit it to turn opinions on the British-Swedish vaccine. Furthermore an Italian health minister says the decision was a political one and that pressure was exerted by other European countries to pause the use of the vaccine. 

Overall I think that the pause of the vaccine was a political one. While there were signs of blood clots as a result of the vaccines administration. The amount of them is common for the age of the patients. Furthermore I believe the pressure put on Italy and other countries situated within Europe was in a bid to further divide Europe from the UK. As a result of the distribution of the vaccine and the agonised feeling left over form Brexit discussions.