Disinfo: Previous Western criticism of the Sputnik V vaccine was due to Russophobia

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”.

publication/media

  • Reported in: Issue 231
  • DATE OF PUBLICATION: 03/02/2021
  • Outlet language(s) Spanish, Castilian
  • Countries and/or Regions discussed in the disinformation: Russia
  • Keywords: Sputnik V, vaccination, West, Mainstream media, Russophobia
see more

Russians bring truth to PACE: Navalny was rescued and not poisoned, Georgia attacked South Ossetia

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.

Disproof

The statements are not true. On January 25, 2021 the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) published a provisional Resolution 2357 (2021), containing the following paragraph 9.11:

"Russian Federation: a number of outstanding concerns, including, inter alia, lack of pluralism, independence of the judiciary, restrictive environment for activities of political extra-parliamentary opposition, civil society, human rights activists and journalists, restrictions on freedom of expression, assembly, association and religion as well as a number of problematic laws including the Foreign Agents Law, the Law on Undesirable Organisations or anti-extremist legislation, ratification of amendments to the Constitution that introduce major restrictions on application of international law and implementation of the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights; the lack of progress with regard to implementing the demands of the international community with regard to Eastern Ukraine, Crimea, the occupied Georgian regions of Abkhazia and Tskhinvali region/South Ossetia and the Transnistrian region of the Republic of Moldova;"

See also the previous PACE resolution on the consequences of the war between Georgia in Russia. Thus, the Assembly considers that:

"from the point of view of international law, the notion of “protecting citizens abroad” is not acceptable and is concerned by the political implications of such a policy by the Russian authorities for other member states", addressing Russian official claim of protecting its own citizens in South Ossetia. While emphasizing that "the initiation of shelling of Tskhinvali without warning by the Georgian military, on 7 August 2008, marked a new level of escalation", PACE stated that "earlier calls to discuss a change in the format of the peacekeeping and conflict resolution process were rejected by South Ossetia and Russia" and addressed the disproportionate Russia's response fire.

As for Alexey Navalny, the PACE's debates (without adopting a resolution yet) took place on January 27, 2021. As is clear from the transcript, the Russian delegation failed to convince other PACE's members that Navalny was not poisoned with the nerve agent and that his prosecution in Russia is not political.

Alexei Navalny was arrested following his return to Russia from Germany, where he was treated for poisoning with Novichok-type chemical nerve agent. The European Union has condemned the arrest of Alexei Navalny and has demanded his immediate release.

Foreign diplomats meddle in Russia's sovereign affairs

Meddling in sovereign affairs. Foreign diplomats gather at Russian court to support Western puppet Navalny.

According to local sources, diplomatic staff of at least 18 foreign states, including those from the United States, the UK, Bulgaria, Germany, Lithuania, Latvia, the Netherlands, Sweden, are present.

Disproof

Court hearings are, as a rule, open to the public. Diplomats have the right, just as any other member of the public, to attend a court hearing. International diplomats are present to observe whether the Russian judiciary fulfils its functions according to Russian law and Russia's international obligations on human rights.

The unfounded and recurrent claim on Navalny being a "Western Puppet" is presented without any evidence. Similar cases here and here.

Navalny's poisoning was a set up against Russia

Moscow has reasons to believe that the alleged poisoning of Alexei Navalny was a set up. Germany has not presented any credible evidence that Russia poisoned Navalny with Novichok despite Moscow’s repeated calls.

Disproof

Recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative on the Navalny poisoning and also a pro-Kremlin approach portraying every measure taken against Russia's actions as Russophobia.

Russian opposition figure Alexei Navalny fell ill during a flight and the plane had to make an emergency landing in Omsk, where doctors said he was in a coma and they were trying to save his life. From Omsk, he had been transferred to Berlin and has received treatment at Berlin's Charité Hospital. The German federal government said that toxicological tests provided “unequivocal evidence of a chemical nerve agent of the Novichok group” in the blood samples of Navalny.