The Minister of Health, Daniel Salinas, had been summoned by Judge Alejandro Recarey but did not appear but was represented by lawyers from the MSP. At the hearing, the judge ruled that the minister must testify and answer 18 questions about vaccination. For this, he arranged for a bailiff or an clerk to take a statement from his office.
In the decree issued by Recarey, he indicated “personally request the response of Daniel Salinas by the bailiff and/or clerk at his work address,” and ordered that the response must be added to the file this Thursday at 9 a.m. The hearing for the amparo appeal will continue this Thursday.
At 9 a.m. this Wednesday, Recarey began the hearing for the appeal filed by lawyer Maximiliano Dentone to cut vaccination against covid to children under 13 years of age.
The 18 questions Salinas will have to answer:
1. Beyond any contractual reserve, have independent studies been carried out by the Uruguayan State on the information provided by its manufacturers, to verify the safety and effectiveness of the vaccine substances in use in Uruguay? Were international independent studies also used?
2. Based on the reservation regarding the composition of the vaccine substances, how, if at all, were the identity and quality controls carried out on each consignment of imported vaccines, one by one, as they arrived in our country? If so, detail -synthetically- amount of analysis and methodology.
3. Were and are all the batches of vaccines that are injected the same? Base if your answer is born from an effective knowledge of its components, or not.
4. For what reason were different types and brands of vaccines administered to different groups or population groups (for example, age groups, for police officers, health personnel, minors, etc.?
5. Are there differential assessment criteria regarding effectiveness and safety for the different brands (Pfizer, Sinovac or Coronavac)?
6. What vaccine is injected into minors, and what are the proven scientific criteria that lead to preferring it to others?
7. Did the MSP monitor the vaccinated and a control group of non-vaccinated individuals to determine rates of infection, re-infection, and death in both groups, obtaining statistically valid and generalizable data? If so, what was it, where can it be examined, who did it and how?
8. It is already known that vaccines, or some of them, contain the so-called “spike protein”. Are you aware of whether your inoculation has adverse effects – in the short, medium and long term – on the structure of the natural immune system of people (in general and especially in children)? Does it generate risk of autoimmunity? If you know there are no negative effects, based on what studies? If studies in this regard had been analyzed by the MSP (or any other national health authority), what were these specifically, what were their origins and who were their authors?
9. Do you know if the “spike protein” has any level of toxicity in itself? If you know that it is not, based on what information?
10. Is Covid-19, SarsCov-2, a disease definable as high or significantly aggressive for children? Does it cause, on average, serious effects? Or is there a predominance of mild effects in the child population? If statistical severity is affirmed in the aforementioned effects, based on what studies is it done?
11. Has the correlation between the occurrence of the disease and vaccination been studied, at the national state level, in the cases of those already vaccinated? That is, contagion, and development of the disease in these hypotheses.
12. Did the cases of Covid-19 in minors grow -of whatever level of severity- after vaccination, in relation to those that had been verified before (for the same age group, of course), in the period that ran from the initial validity of the health emergency of the year 2020, and the beginning of the inoculations to minors? In the event that after vaccinating minors an increase in cases had been reported in them, have the causes been studied? How?
13. Does the vaccination process during an epidemic increase the variability of mutations in virus proteins? Does it harm in any way the natural reaction of the immune system of those inoculated, especially minors?
14. Has it been studied whether, in the case of the vaccines supplied in Uruguay, the usual three-year trial protocols with control groups have been followed? Are you aware that the Pfizer company, in relation to the vaccine that is supplied to minors in Uruguay, has eliminated its control groups? Or avoided in any way its implementation and development?
15. If the answer to the previous question shows that the effects of vaccines have not been analysed, with due safety protocols, could it be technically argued that vaccination implies a risk factor, even a relative risk? Or not (and in your case why)?
16. Are you aware of the existence of international reports, such as. those of the VAERS (or others), who report deaths or serious secondary effects -at any age- linked to the vaccines that are supplied in Uruguay? If so, have they been studied by the Uruguayan State? At what level, by whom and with what results?
17. Has the evidence been studied in Uruguay to conclude that vaccination against Covid-19 in minors produces more benefits than risks? If so, at what level, by whom, and with what results?
18. Did the Uruguayan State study the report of the “Pharmacology and Therapeutics Committee of the Uruguayan Society of Pediatrics”, dated 9.XI.2021 (and signed by seven university professors), which pointed to the risks of vaccination in minors 12 years old? In your case, what scientific-technical reasons would have led to the MSP being discarded (in practice)?
