Disinfo: EU normally imposes tight regulation but not on the untested Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine


The more surprising is that Pfizer, which lacks experience in the field of vaccine manufacturing, insisted that the agreement with the European Medicines Agency should not hold it responsible for the complications of using its vaccine, which is strange because European authorities usually impose tight control on drug manufacturers.


Recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative about vaccination.

Pfizer does not lack expertise in vaccine development. Pfizer has been involved in the commercial production of vaccines since the early 1900s and was has received several awards until today.

The European Medicines Agency has authorised the Pfizer-BioNTech coronavirus vaccine, granting it “a conditional marketing authorisation” with “all the safeguards, controls and obligations this entails”.

Conditional marketing authorisation is one of EU’s regulatory mechanisms for facilitating early access to medicines that fulfil an unmet medical need, including in emergency situations such as the current pandemic. And in line with the EU’s safety monitoring plan for COVID-19 vaccines, Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine will be closely monitored and subject to several activities that apply specifically to COVID-19 vaccines.

Exemption from civil liability is known under conditional marketing. This was the only answer for maintaining the speed and scale of development and rollout of the vaccines. Under the current circumstances, EU member states' governments were focusing on trying to save as many lives as possible during the pandemic. The European Commission said: “it needed to act as quickly as possible while safeguarding patient safety”.

Read more cases that claim that the West wants to discredit Sputnik-V vaccine, or that EU prohibits countries from saving its citizens from COVID-19, and that the reasons for the West's criticism of Sputnik-V vaccine are political, or that ugly commercial interests are behind the criticism of the Russian COVID-19 vaccine, or that WHO confirms the "Sputnik-V" vaccine is safe and effective, or even that people shouldn’t trust the Moderna vaccine, and that NATO has a policy of discrediting “Sputnik-V”.


View more
  • Reported in: Issue 228
  • DATE OF PUBLICATION: 20/01/2021
  • Outlet language(s) Arabic
  • Countries and/or Regions discussed in the disinformation: Europe, EU
  • Keywords: coronavirus, vaccination, EU regulations, European Union, Information war
see more

Special forces detachment "Berkut" tried to protect Ukrainians 7 years ago

Seven years ago, armed clashes broke out in the centre of Kyiv when militant-nationalists from Western Ukraine were brought to Kyiv and the special forces, “Berkut”, tried to protect Ukrainians.


This is a recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative about the Euromaidan protests.

The Ukrainian revolution started from the gathering of students in Kyiv after former president Viktor Yanukovych refused to sign the EU Association Agreement. They were not 'militant-nationalists' who were 'brought to Kyiv'. The memories of participants are well-documented and it shows that there were people from all over the country who participated by their own will. Far-right groups had a very limited presence during the protests.

Navalny is used as an instrument by the Western special services

Foreign states are behind all the actions of the opposition leader Alexei Navalny; there is no place for such people who “betrayed the country” in the Russian authorities.

Today, Navalny is used as an instrument (interference) by the Western special services, the State Department. Everyone should have an understanding that everything he does is backed by foreign states. Our task is to prevent foreign interference, whoever pursues policy here, the country must be protected.

And if a person has betrayed the country, if he is on foreign funding, there is nothing for him to do in any government bodies. You cannot help him engage in politics, represent our citizens in different government bodies.


Recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative about Alexey Navalny.

Anti-corruption campaigner Alexei Navalny has long been the most prominent face of Russian opposition to President Vladimir Putin. His candidacy in the 2018 presidential election was banned by authorities over his conviction by a Russian court of embezzlement, which bars him from running for office. He has been arrested and imprisoned several times during his political career.

Navalny's arrest could be used by the West to impose new anti-Russian sanctions

The arrest of opposition leader Alexey Navalny after his return to Moscow from Germany, where he was hospitalised after he fell ill in Omsk, Siberia, has provoked a new wave of reactions in the West against Russia. Many analysts believe that this is part of a strategy to impose new sanctions against Moscow.


A new twist of a previously used pro-Kremlin narrative that the poisoning of Alexei Navalny (and now his return to Russia) is a secret project to introduce sanctions on Russia.

Contrary to the claim, which is not backed by any evidence, Alexei Navalny is an independent Russian politician, not a pawn of any foreign government. His decision to return to Russia is related to his refusal to become an exile and to internal deliberations of his political movement, not to any order from abroad.