We really convince people every month more and more that in Russia, it turns out, what is written in the Western European mass media is not happening. We prove that Navalny was saved and not poisoned. We show that on August 8, 2008, it was Saakashvili’s regime that invaded Tskhinvali and that the Russian peacekeepers also suffered, but Russia did not invade. We prove that there must be the truth here in PACE.
Summary
The publication of the study of The Lancet changed completely the headlines about the Sputnik V in many media. Why is this? Facts talk by themselves. There has always been a background of Russophobia against everything Russian and Slavic among Anglo-Saxon elites and their puppets, but in face of the scientific reality and the inefficiency of other vaccines, they realised that the Sputnik V vaccine not only is effective but is also useful for public health.
Disproof
This is a recurrent pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative, blaming any criticism of Russian actions on “Russophobia”.
Contrary to the claim, previous criticism and mistrust of the Sputnik V vaccine were not due to any alleged Russophobia but to the publication of incomplete or questionable data about it, surrounded by a disinformation campaign about this and other vaccines.
This campaign was launched after the original announcement about the Sputnik V was met with scepticism and criticism even by Russian specialists in the country. Experts' reports conclude that Russia has perceived the development of a coronavirus vaccine in terms of geopolitical and economic gain.
Reservations and criticism of the Russian Sputnik V coronavirus vaccine stem from the fact that Russia did not complete large trials to test the vaccine’s safety and efficacy before releasing it. Rolling out an inadequately vetted vaccine could endanger people who receive it. On September 4, 2020, scientists of the Gamaleya Institute responsible for the creation of the Sputnik V published an article in the scientific publication The Lancet showing results from phases 1 and 2 trials, which was immediately touted by pro-Kremlin media as the ultimate validation of the vaccine. However, the data was denounced as flawed by a group of prominent scientists and doctors headed by Enrico Bucci, a biology professor at Temple University in the U.S. Bucci warned about strange patterns in the data, such as duplicate values for different groups of patients, which he considered highly improbable.
On February 2, 2021, interim results from a phase 3 trial of the Sputnik V COVID-19 vaccine were finally published in The Lancet. The trial results show a consistent strong protective effect across all participant age groups, meaning that the Sputnik V vaccine candidate appears safe and effective. This is what led to a general change in the approach towards the Sputnik V. All vaccines, authorised by the European Medicines Agency are welcome in the EU. As of the 17 February 2021, the producer of the Sputnik V vaccine has not sumbitted a market authorisation to the European Medicines Agency.
See other examples of these pro-Kremlin disinformation narratives in our database, such as claims that Western attacks on the Russian coronavirus vaccine are a corporate cold war against humanity or"Russian progress in COVID-19 vaccine has become for the West an outrageous challenge, that Sputnik V is a target of the corporate cold war; that the West wants to discredit the Sputnik V; that the WHO and Microsoft sabotaged the Russian vaccine, 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.
This disinformation message appeared in the same clip as the claim that “Pfizer and Moderna RNA ‘vaccines’ are not real vaccines, since they are not based on adenovirus”.