A scientist responds to the protection so that anticovid vaccination is suspended

Last week, the lawyer Maximiliano Dentone demanded the “suspension of vaccination against covid-19 in children” through an amparo remedy, alleging that there are fundamental rights at stake and that the State “carries out a real experiment, taking children as ‘laboratory mice’.”

Given this, the subrogated judge of the Administrative Litigation Alejandro Recarey on July 1, the Ministry of Public Health (MSP) and the Pfizer company were ordered to submit information regarding the coronavirus vaccines, their composition, their side effects, and the contract between the government and the company. The resolution also implicates information linked to Sinovac and AstraZeneca vaccines.

Recarey gave the agencies involved 48 business hours to present information on 15 Dentone requests, as explained by judicial resolution 1189/2022 to which The Observer agreed. The MSP is already collecting information to present it in court this Wednesday morning, Health Minister Daniel Salinas told El Observador.

In this context, Uruguayan virologist Santiago Mirazo responded, in dialogue with The Observerto the proposals that Dentone made to demand the suspension of vaccination against covid-19 in children.

Vaccination is safe

According to Mirazo, Dentone’s claim that the virus is not biologically isolated, cultivated and sequenced, but rather that it is a computer procedure because its existence is digital and therefore its biological existence could not be proven. it is “very difficult to understand” from the scientific point of view.

In turn, he maintained that doubts about whether the virus is isolated, cultured or sequenced they are “unfounded” since as of July 4, 2022 “3.5 million complete genome sequences of SARS-CoV-2 had been published” so “it is very difficult to think that there is an agreement between no less than 500,000 researchers around the world to invent a sequence of the virus and that they all agree with it.”

Regarding isolation, the expert indicated that the virus “yes it is isolated” Since it was “one of the first things that was done when the pandemic emerged and it was possible to identify”. “The virus was quickly isolated and it was isolated so much that to make inactivated virus vaccines such as Coronavac or Sinopharm it is necessary to have the virus isolated, otherwise the vaccine cannot be made”, he pointed.

Another of the proposals made to suspend vaccination in children is that the therapeutic and surveillance committee of the Uruguayan Society of Pediatrics, based on the fact that the safety of the vaccine is not duly accredited, advises against its use. According to Mirazo, Pfizer shows “the best safety profile of all age ranges, with severe adverse effects being very infrequent, around one in 20,000.”

In addition, they are not “life-threatening” effects but are reversible effects. “All the databases show exactly the same thing, that it is an extremely safe vaccine, particularly in children since the doses are lower than in adults. Until August of last year, with some 400 million doses administered, the United States only registered three cases of deaths probably associated with vaccination, which shows how infrequent severe effects really are in the population when doses of Pfizer”.

According to the document presented by Dantone, the substances that are inoculated are not authorized by the FDA (United States drug agency) but are used based on a US military law that allows their emergency approval. Mirazo maintained that this statement “is incorrect” since “all the components of the messenger RNA vaccine – including the excipients and the lipid nanoparticles – are approved compounds”.

“When all the information is not available based on the time to give definitive approval, emergency approval is chosen, as has been given for multiple vaccines in history. It is not an exclusive tool that has been invented for covid-19 but it is a frequent tool”, he explained.

And I add: “Messenger RNA has historically been usedit is not a recent use but it has more than 30 years of research, therefore, it is known what the components of the vaccines are, particularly that of Pfizer”.

Adverse effects and “toxic” components

In regards to Adverse effects (1,291 that the Pfizer vaccine can cause), Mirazo stated that “all vaccines can produce that number of side effects and more” and that the key is how many severe adverse effects are generated. on that linemaintained that 95% of the adverse effects are mild and include headache, pain at the site of the puncture and inflammation, which are “very common” effects.

The expert was also consulted about the complainants’ complaint that the MSP has so far refused to give the figures of deaths from the vaccine and the suggestion that at the level of the countries that have vaccinated the most, multiplied the number of deaths from adverse effects of vaccines.

Mirazo replied that the scientific community “would also like to know these data.” Personally, he was of the opinion that he would allow her to demonstrate “that the development of anticovid vaccines has been the greatest milestone of the century”.

“I have not the slightest doubt that when you see these data on the reduction in mortality from covid-19, when you see the impact that the vaccines have had in reducing the lethality of the covid-19 infection, We are going to finish demonstrating that anticovid vaccines have been the greatest scientific milestone of the 21st century so far“, held.

Another argument used by the person who applied for the appeal was based on the report by Professor Pablo Campra of the University of Almería, who maintains that the substances that are inoculated would contain graphene oxide and foreign nanotechnological material. In turn, the substances would contain messenger RNA whose incidence in the human genome is unknown.

Mirazo indicated that this “it is a personal study” from which the University of Almería distanced itself and that did not pass the criteria of argumentative and methodological soundness required by the scientific system.

“These are results that have been refuted by the greatest specialists in this type of study. involving spectrometry, photometry and electron microscopy. They have discredited due to its lack of methodological solidity and the conclusions that are not supported by the results“, he pointed.

Regarding the presence of graphene oxide and graphene in vaccines, the specialist maintained that the evaluations made after the Campra report they do not suggest the existence of these components. “In any case, graphene oxide is a molecule that is biodegradable, non-toxic and is even being evaluated as a carrier for future vaccines. In other words, it has a biotechnological utility to be used in the future and it has also been seen in very recent studies that it can inhibit the replication of SARS-CoV-2, so graphene oxide, if it were in the vaccine, which it is not, could even be beneficial”, he indicated.

Regarding graphene, Mirazo said that it is a “potentially toxic” substance, but “in quantities that are impossible to find eventually in any vial the size of the Pfizer vaccine.” “The results of the Campra report “have been refuted by experienced and recognized researchers, which does not have much scientific support.””, he concluded.