Disinfo: EU’s decision not to purchase the Sputnik V is questionable, other vaccines may be dangerous

Summary

The EU’s decision not to purchase Russian vaccine Sputnik V is unacceptable and impossible to understand, since it belongs to a well studied type of vaccines while others are of a new, and maybe dangerous, genetic type. Some experts can’t understand why the European Commission is not including the Russian vaccine developed with traditional technology in its plan of future purchases […] while the data of the full study published in The Lancet shows that it is safe and efficient.

Disproof

The messages in the articles are a part of a disinformation campaign aiming to promote the Russian Sputnik V vaccine and discredit Western vaccines, launched after approval of the Sputnik V vaccine was met with scepticism and criticism, even by Russian specialists in the country.

There are serious doubts about the safety and the efficiency of the Sputnik V vaccine, given the lack of transparency of the Russian authorities about it. Contrary to the claim, the article published in The Lancet by the developers of the vaccine wasn’t a full study, but partial data on the phases 1 and 2 of testing, and its results were immediately contested by a group of prominent scientists and doctors who raised their concern about what they called the “very strange patterns in the data” such as the “duplicate values for different [groups of] patients”. Those scientists called for the publication of the original and full data, which Russia has not done.

See other examples of these disinformation narratives in our database, such as claims that Western attacks on the Russian coronavirus vaccine are a corporate Cold War against humanity; that a report on the Covid-19 situation in Russia aims to discredit the Sputnik V vaccine or that the UK launched a smear campaign against it; that British propaganda tries to dilute the failure of the AstraZeneca vaccine against the Sputnik V; that the US and the EU face multiple deaths out of fear of admitting Russia’s success against coronavirus; that the WHO confirmed that the Sputnik V was on Phase 3 of clinical testing already in August 2020; that the WHO and Microsoft sabotaged the Russian vaccine; that Europe is turning to Russia due to its desperate need for a vaccine; or that the West criticises the Sputnik V because it can’t accept Russia’s primacy and because its pharmaceutical companies will lose billions of dollars.

publication/media

  • Reported in: Issue 223
  • DATE OF PUBLICATION: 02/12/2020
  • Language/target audience: Spanish, Castilian, Czech, Greek
  • Country: EU, Russia
  • Keywords: Sputnik V, coronavirus, vaccination, European Union

Disclaimer

Cases in the EUvsDisinfo database focus on messages in the international information space that are identified as providing a partial, distorted, or false depiction of reality and spread key pro-Kremlin messages. This does not necessarily imply, however, that a given outlet is linked to the Kremlin or editorially pro-Kremlin, or that it has intentionally sought to disinform. EUvsDisinfo publications do not represent an official EU position, as the information and opinions expressed are based on media reporting and analysis of the East Stratcom Task Force.

see more

Turkey may introduce ISIS members in the EU for terrorist attacks at Christmas

Former MI6 member Aimen Dean told the Daily Mail that ISIS decided to respond to the EU’s challenge, and its leaders are training militants in Syria and Libya. Afterwards, the plan is to send them to Europe through Turkey and the Mediterranean Sea. Through its agreements with the illegitimate Government of National Accord, Turkey is constantly transferring military equipment, ammunition and radical Islamists from Syria and Libya to strength the GNA forces, whose Coast Guard supervises the refugee ships and regulates its flux towards the EU. As a consequence, there may be ISIS terrorists among the passengers of those ships. Is is possible to think that jihadists have infiltrated the territory of France, Germany and UK already since a long time. Those terrorists may take advantage of the relaxation of the restrictive measures against Covid-19 during Christmas. In those celebrations, Europeans will be able to move freely in the streets and gather in squares. Those crowds will become the main target of the jihadists.

Disproof

Conspiracy theory not supported by any evidence. Though it is true that former MI6 member Aimen Dean warned of the possibility of ISIS attacks in European countries during Christmas during a security conference in London, which was covered by the Daily Mail, and he said that they could reach Europe through Turkey and the Mediterranean Sea, there was no mention to any Turkish participation in this scheme. The story was deliberately distorted to support pro-Kremlin narratives in Libya, where Turkey has been opposed to Russia’s interests. Contrary to the claim, the Government of National Accord is not illegitimate but recognised by the United Nations.

See other examples of similar disinformation narratives in our database, such as claims that British MI6 is behind Turkey’s actions in Karabakh; that after Karabakh, Turkey will take over Crimea; that if Georgia joins NATO, its territory will be annexed by Turkey; that the Turkish-Greek crisis took NATO to its limits; or that Erdogan’s task is to make the South Caucasus to explode for NATO to invade the region.

European sanctions against Russia do not work

European sanctions against Russia do not work; Germany and Europe want to be at war with Russia again.

Disproof

This statement contains two recurring pro-Kremlin narratives. The first one claims that Western sanctions on Russia do not have any effect on the Russian economy and the second alleges that the EU wants a war with Russia.

The EU sanctions against Russia were adopted as a reaction to the annexation of Crimea in 2014 and the deliberate destabilisation of Ukraine.

UK rushes to approve “NATO vaccine”

After the spectacular failure of the AstraZeneca vaccine, the UK is operating a “vaccine war” by authorising in a rush the US/German vaccine of Pfizer/BioNTech before the US and Germany, its own makers. This looks like a very “British” geopolitical manoeuvre of a war vaccine: “NATO’s vaccine”. Knowing of the legendary perfidy of the British, it is not surprising that the British try to control the geopolitical logistics of the vaccine at a global scale. They are so fanaticised that, after their own vaccine of AstraZeneca failed, they prefer to test a US/German vaccine than using the Russian Sputnik V – with a cost 7 times lower and that doesn’t require a -70ºC refrigeration, which requires an enormous additional cost- or the several Chinese vaccines.

Disproof

This is part of a disinformation campaign aiming to promote the Russian Sputnik V vaccine and discredit Western vaccines, attempting to frame the British decision to authorise the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine and purchase 40 million doses as a geopolitical decision influenced by NATO. Contrary to the claim, the Pfizer/BioNTech project is not “NATO’s vaccine”, but a public-private enterprise who was partially funded by the German government though not by the US authorities.

This disinformation campaign was launched after approval of the Sputnik V vaccine was met with scepticism and criticism, even by Russian specialists in the country. See other examples in our database, such as claims that Western attacks on the Russian coronavirus vaccine are a corporate Cold War against humanity; that a report on the Covid-19 situation in Russia aims to discredit the Sputnik V vaccine or that the UK launched a smear campaign against it; that British propaganda tries to dilute the failure of the AstraZeneca vaccine against the Sputnik V; that the US and the EU face multiple deaths out of fear of admitting Russia’s success against coronavirus; that the WHO confirmed that the Sputnik V was on Phase 3 of clinical testing already in August 2020; that the WHO and Microsoft sabotaged the Russian vaccine; that Europe is turning to Russia due to its desperate need for a vaccine; or that the West criticises the Sputnik V because it can’t accept Russia’s primacy and because its pharmaceutical companies will lose billions of dollars.