dortt
Registered User
For the high risk people, getting the cold is surely a better outcome than getting the coronavirus
Comes down to risk management
Comes down to risk management
I don't even think Brazil's worry here is how it works but is instead Brazil not liking that it appears to them they got an incomplete application and bad vaccine samples.For the high risk people, getting the cold is surely a better outcome than getting the coronavirus
Comes down to risk management
Yeah, but as a result, the spike protein isn't getting made enough to be effectiveFor the high risk people, getting the cold is surely a better outcome than getting the coronavirus
Comes down to risk management
For the high risk people, getting the cold is surely a better outcome than getting the coronavirus
Comes down to risk management
There's more trouble than just that. Check post#21 for the WP article.
Lack of quality control
Little to no adverse effect data
Batches completely different than the ones used in the trials
Flaws in every stage of the clinical studies
Lack of identified manufacturing conditions that demonstrate that the products are consistently produced and controlled
Regulatory agency inspection refusal
Red flag after red flag
Oops:
Was expecting some issues to be found when under bigger scrutiny, but that's a big one.
Oops:
Was expecting some issues to be found when under bigger scrutiny, but that's a big one.
Imagine quoting the Sputnik V twitter account for anything vaccine related. It's like quoting the NRA for gun safety stuff.
Pure propaganda account.
If I understand correctly, this account is run by the PR guys from the Gamaleya Research Institute (or hired by them), so it is not a propaganda, but an official answer from the Sputnik's developers.
I know it comes from the Gamaleya Institute. It doesn't change the fact this account has been spreading propaganda against the other vaccine while pretending the Sputnik V vaccine is perfect.
Just look at the 2nd tweet:
The document shows based on public data from regulators that Sputnik V demonstrates the best safety record of any vaccine. Big pharma opponents of Sputnik V are scared of its success, cannot find any weaknesses and are forced to come up with fake news that are easy to refute.
How can you take that seriously?
It's either pumping his tires against the other vaccines or going on any news pointing at something negative about Sputnik V and calling them fake news/attacks while never providing actual data.
If you have followed some of the recent statements by the official diplomatic(!) Russian services, then you may have noticed the similar style there, so it is kind of a new official Russian rhetorics. Not too classy I'd say, but that's how it is.
I would say that's an additional red flag, not an explanation.
It is not an explanation either, just a statement like "It is not true. And we are the best.".
I meant the fact that they are copying Russia's diplomacy model, but yes.
I mean, it was shady from the moment they named it Sputnik V (well even before that, but yeah).
Imagine quoting the Sputnik V twitter account for anything vaccine related. It's like quoting the NRA for gun safety stuff.
Pure propaganda account.
Yeah, and American (or Canadian) doctor is absolutely unbiased, when talking about Russian vaccine. Sure, 100% true.
If you can't see it, that's on you.
I know it comes from the Gamaleya Institute. It doesn't change the fact this account has been spreading propaganda against the other vaccine while pretending the Sputnik V vaccine is perfect.
Just look at the 2nd tweet:
The document shows based on public data from regulators that Sputnik V demonstrates the best safety record of any vaccine. Big pharma opponents of Sputnik V are scared of its success, cannot find any weaknesses and are forced to come up with fake news that are easy to refute.
How can you take that seriously?
It's either pumping his tires against the other vaccines or going on any news pointing at something negative about Sputnik V and calling them fake news/attacks while never providing actual data.
Yeah, and American (or Canadian) doctor is absolutely unbiased, when talking about Russian vaccine. Sure, 100% true.
I mean, it's Brazilian doctors and researchers that have raised the red flags. I don't think Brazil has any particular bias and in fact they seem to have good relations with Russia these days.
I've already talked about, whether they have bias or not. And https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2021/03/16/hhs-brazil-sputnik-russia/
It doesn't look like another Gamaleya propaganda, does it?
Argentina has already recieved 4.8M doses of Sputnik V. Dozens countries and millions people have already used the vaccine. Even Putin used it, and he would have never used anything, that was remotely dangerous to him.
Now, I've heard, that Brazil was under heavy American pressure to not approve Sputnik, and the case is now in Brazilian Supreme Court.
That's how I see it.
Earlier this month, Slovakia’s pharmaceutical regulator scrapped a batch of Sputnik V doses it said did not share “the same characteristics and properties” as those examined by the Lancet.