Sputnik V: It's what "alt media" craves!
The shilling must end
Thomas Röper, curator of Anti-Spiegel, proclaimed last week that compulsory COVID vaccination in the Russian military is a “hoax.” We responded to this assertion here and here.
In the same article, Röper claimed there is “compulsory vaccination for [Russian] doctors working in hospitals so that they do not (or are less likely) to pass the disease on to patients who are already weak.”
He added at the end of his article:
I'm not aware of any serious side effects after vaccination with Sputnik V, but it happens very often that people feel weak and have a fever for two to three days after being vaccinated with Sputnik V.
Is Röper claiming Sputnik V is safe and effective? Because it sort of sounds like he is?
Let’s compare Röper-Reality to Actual-Reality.
“I'm not aware of any serious side effects after vaccination with Sputnik V” — Thomas Röper, October 4, 2022
This is a very puzzling thing for someone to type in October 2022.
Where to even begin?
Pavel Vorobyov, Chairman of the Moscow Scientific Society of Physicians, told an interviewer in September 2021:
The fact is that nothing is registered in Russia at all. Therefore, it is very difficult to understand how many serious complications there are.
There are many cases, and we can say that they are related to the vaccine. There is a lot to say. Or you can stick your head in the sand and say that there is nothing at all.
In the same month, Dr. Vitaly Zverev, a professor of virology and member of the Russian Academy of Sciences, found a close correlation between the increase in vaccination and the increase in morbidity and mortality from COVID-19 in Russia.
“Nobody knows about the long-term consequences [of the vaccines]. Therefore, it is impossible as of now to vaccinate three times with the vector adenovirus vaccine that is actively used in Russia [Sputnik V],” Zverev concluded.
In October 2021, Russian doctors and activists held a conference in St. Petersburg to discuss the “safety and efficacy” of Sputnik V and other Russian COVID shots.
Activist Denis Shulga told the gathering:
[T]he first reports of deaths from these experimental drugs, erroneously called vaccines, began to appear as early as the spring of 2021.
At the beginning, there were few of them, and citizens did not pay enough attention to them. Since June 2021, there have been more such reports, because officials began to actively force people to join the experiment.
Since September 2021, an average of at least a dozen new reports of citizens dying shortly after vaccination began to appear on the Internet every day. Social activists, independent researchers began to collect their own databases. Today, the “League of Patient Defenders”, “Parents of Moscow”, “Stopvaccism”, the Victims of Vaccinalism telegram channel, and individual bloggers are doing this.
Our Stovaccism project has a database of 430 such reports of deaths after the use of experimental drugs supposedly to prevent death and severe disease. These are all stories with specific names and documents. There are an order of magnitude more anonymous messages.
Dr. Nikolai Bocharov:
[T]he drugs that are used in Russia for vaccination against coronavirus do not provide immune protection against COVID-19 and do not stand up to scrutiny.
After the start of mass vaccination, mortality from COVID-19 began to grow. There is a medium to high correlation between the incidence of coronavirus and vaccination. The most obvious degree of correlation was in Israel and France, less significant - in Russia. The data showed a 16% increase in mortality from COVID-19 in the first three months since the start of mass vaccination in Russia. Now in our country this figure remains one of the highest in the world. All the data and graphs show that the mortality rate among the vaccinated is also increasing… It can be concluded that the developed drugs do not provide immune protection against the COVID-19 disease.
Dr. Sofya Naumenko:
I have been working as a general practitioner for more than 15 years, and I have never seen such a number of patients after vaccination.
We have always had vaccines, but complications were rare. Today I receive daily patients with complications. They are divided into two types: urgent and delayed complications. It can be both the most difficult conditions, and those that many do not immediately pay attention to. The huge polymorphism of symptoms is caused by the peculiarities of the virus itself and the vaccination.
Worst of all, vaccines seem to cause the same symptoms as the so-called “post-COVID syndrome”, which often manifests itself in people some time after suffering COVID-19. This suggests the following: either the vaccine is not effective, or it is the cause of the same symptoms - and then this is the basis for its immediate withdrawal.
Even if people think they tolerated the vaccine well, there is no guarantee that they won't experience the same problems two months later. The main problems include damage to the nervous tissue and blood clotting. It turns out that we are already treating people for vaccination, not for the disease. The current situation is extremely dangerous.
Questions about Sputnik V’s “safety and efficacy” compelled Deputy Speaker of the State Duma Pyotr Tolstoy to concede:
There are few answers to the questions why those who are vaccinated are ill, why those who are vaccinated die, why there are problems and complications after the vaccinations themselves.
In December 2021, Russian outlet sobesednik.ru asked readers if they knew anyone who had gotten sick after being vaccinated.
The results:
The outlet wrote:
In mid-December, we decided to ask readers a question: Do you have friends who got sick after vaccination? The results were stunning.
A month later, interest in the survey has not dried up, and more and more new users continue to take part in it. So far, almost 40,000 people have voted. Most of the respondents—92%—reported that they had encountered cases of the disease after vaccination.
In the comments, people even talk about deaths:
- “A friend was vaccinated on August 4 to stay to work, on the 10th she was taken to a COVID ward, on August 25 she died ....” — says Irina Chistyakova
- “My wife and I were vaccinated in May. In July, both became seriously ill. I was lucky, I got out … The wife is not. Died” — shares A. Bugaets
- “Now my brother and his wife are sick, the second injection was 2 weeks ago. The mother-in-law fell ill two days before the second injection, a classmate died two months after the second injection from COVID, 54 years old” — writes Alexander Kozlov.
Your correspondent interviewed Dr. Denis Ivanov, a member of Russia’s Doctors for Truth, in December 2021. We asked him if he could respond to the Russian government’s claim that Sputnik V was “safe and effective.”
His answer: “This is a blatant lie.”
He noted that because the government does not disclose post-vaccination complications in the country, activists and concerned citizens have been using Telegram and social media to share reports of suspected vaccine-linked injuries and deaths.
Ivanov also provided us with a 43-page document listing suspected vaccine-linked deaths among healthcare workers in Russia:
In May 2022, Rusisa’s Independent Association of Physicians published an updated list of suspected vaccine-linked deaths in the country. The group asked the Attorney General’s Office to investigate the reports, which were collected via social media and could not be independently verified.
Without the cooperation of the Russian government and health authorities, it’s unlikely we’ll ever be able to gauge the true “safety” and “efficacy” of Sputnik V. But data from other countries might shed light on whether Sputnik V is a safe alternative to western clot-shots.
Krasnaya Vesna, which inspected Sputnik V’s safety record in countries that report adverse reactions, determined that “in terms of the frequency of expected mild and severe (requiring hospitalization) side effects, [Sputnik V] is comparable to foreign counterparts.”
Here’s the latest vaccine safety report (June 2022) from Argentina’s Ministry of Health:
Since the earliest days of the so-called pandemic, RT and “alt media” pundits have been working overtime to try to convince disaffected westerners that Sputnik V is a safe and effective alternative to the Big Pharma slurries (even though the Russian government and AstraZeneca started collaborating on COVID shots in July 2020, and even though Sputnik V is a clone of AstraZeneca’s genetic goo).
Here’s Röper, writing in July 2021:
Since Sputnik V is now being administered in over 60 countries [approved, not used — Edward], the complete absence of side effects cannot be attributed to manipulation by the Russian government, since other countries would report serious side effects. To date, however, not a single case has been reported.
This is comical. How can the Russian government “manipulate” reports of serious side effects when it doesn’t even disclose such reports in the first place? And now that other countries are linking Sputnik V to serious side effects, why does Röper continue to claim Sputnik V is safe and effective?
While we’re on the topic—we have an important question for Röper.
If Sputnik V is so safe and so effective, why is Russia developing its own mRNA clot-shots?
In December 2021, Röper declared that unlike western vaccines, Sputnik V could be trusted because it wasn’t an mRNA shot and wasn’t part of Bill Gates’ vaccine racket:
Bill Gates is against Sputnik V, Gates propagates mRNA technology, especially the vaccine from BionTech / Pfizer, because Gates is a strategic investor in both Pfizer and BionTech, he earns money on every vaccine dose from BionTech / Pfizer. Gates does not earn anything from Sputnik-V and Sputnik V is not an mRNA vaccine.
Alright, so… why is Russia now developing two separate mRNA “vaccines”?
Denis Logunov, the deputy director of the Gamaleya Center (developer of Russia’s flagship unproven genetic slurry, Sputnik V), announced on September 28:
The technology of mRNA vaccines has a very important advantage: it can be administered at least every month … Here is the natural limitation of vector vaccines, which you cannot administer more than once every six months, because antibodies appear, they must decrease. Six months—this is the minimum, the ideal period between two injections. <...> Therefore, this decision was made, by order of the director [Sputnik V Papa Bear Alexander Gintsburg], a laboratory group was created to develop such [mRNA] vaccines. Here I will present you our new data regarding the mRNA platform,” he said.
Logunov said that mRNA vaccines such as Pfizer or Moderna give strong immunity after three to four vaccinations.
TASS reported a day later:
The State Scientific Center for Virology and Biotechnology "Vector" of Rospotrebnadzor is conducting research to develop an mRNA vaccine against coronavirus. […]
According to [Elena] Nechaeva, [deputy director of the Vector center], the development of mRNA vaccines is a promising area all over the world.
It is expected that the advantages of the vaccine being developed over the already existing Russian vaccines, including the “Epivaccorona” of the Vector" center, will be the safety, speed of production and cost of drugs. […]
Nechaeva noted that today there are difficulties with the supply of raw materials.
“We will pick up some replacements, something will be produced in Russia, the same enzymes. Russian developers keep up with the times and keep up with world science. I think Russian mRNA vaccines will be in demand,” she said.
If Sputnik V was developed as an anti-Big Pharma serum, why is Russia planning to create two separate mRNA clot-shots, even after this technology has been linked to so much misery and death all over the world?
If Sputnik V is safe and effective, why even bother with creating new COVID “vaccines”?
Curious minds want to know, Röper. Help us out.
Also, please stop shilling Sputnik V. Thanks.
Subscribe to Edward Slavsquat? Could be fun!
I admire the strength and patience you have invested in meticulously substantiating your arguments and addressing the individual points. I know that none of this will be considered on "Anti-Spiegel". The blog operator and the readers there lack the necessary self-distance for this. They are writing in support for the "good side", and seem to think that anything but a black-and-white scheme would confuse people.
The consequences are that Röper growing a core readership that—like the readers of the Saker forum and many others—only ever confirms their perspective and at the same time "inoculates" themselves against any criticism.
But I have the impression that this is not enough for an increasing number of minds. In the current chaos of the global upheavals, many people have lost trust in their politicians and media. Some are now simply turning the tables and cheering on the opposite side. But a good portion of them have really grasped something and are questioning the new certainty as well, which is good. We need blogs like Edward Slavsquat to unsettle our cherished views and force us to think on.
Subjectively, it seems to me that more people online are taking note of this blog (maybe the reader statistics prove that), and even some comments at Röper's pointed out that "Waggaman still does have good arguments that should be addressed".
Röper seems to be unaware of the saying ‘the enemy of my enemy is still a piece of shit’.