Biologist to anti-vaxхers: “The world scientific community has recognized the effectiveness of Sputnik

Another attempt to persuade anti-vaxxers was made in his blog by the well-known Russian scientist, candidate of biological sciences, member of the Russian Academy of Sciences' Commission for Combating Pseudoscience, winner of the Enlightener Prize, Alexander Panchin:

It is no secret that the daily death rate from covid in Russia is more than 1000 people. “In my opinion, this is a tragedy, writes Panchin - And I am sad to realize that many deaths could have been avoided if we were more willing and more active to vaccinate against the coronavirus. The vaccine will not make you sterile, it will not turn you into mutants, you will not grow a tail and a third ear. You will not only protect yourself - you will bring humanity one step closer to the end of the pandemic". The scientist hopes that the two dozen arguments that he gave will be able to convince at least someone to get vaccinated or revaccinated against coronavirus.

One of the main obstacles for Russian anti-vaxxers is the Russian Sputnik vaccine, in which effectiveness they simply do not believe. Here's how Panchin responds to these kinds of arguments:

“It would be great if vaccines against coronavirus from Pfizer, Moderna, CanSino Biologics, AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson appeared in Russia. Alas, I cannot influence this. And yet the Sputnik vaccine was developed not by government officials, but by highly qualified specialists. The main creator of the vaccine, Denis Logunov, is a respected and quoted scientist. The developers of the vaccine were not previously noticed in any falsifications. Moreover, Sputnik is registered in almost 70 countries.

The principle of all approved vector and mRNA vaccines, including Sputnik and the same Pfizer, is very similar: some human cells will produce the surface S-protein of the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus and expose its parts to their surface. Then the cells of the immune system recognize regions of the foreign protein and begin to actively divide. Some cells will produce antibodies against this protein, some will become memory cells and will be ready to fight a full-fledged virus if it appears..."

Regarding the fears that Sputnik was made too quickly, Panchin writes:

“The beauty of vector and mRNA vaccines is that they can easily replace the gene they deliver. Therefore, as soon as the genetic sequences of the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus were read and published in China, scientists from all over the world could immediately get to work, even without having the virus in their hands. Such vaccines build on earlier developments in the delivery of genetic material. It's like a constructor in which it is not difficult to change parts.

It is more difficult to conduct clinical trials and establish mass production. With the first, alas, the speed of the spread of the infection helps. It is not difficult to collect enough statistics on infection cases. And the mass production of vaccines was possible thanks to serious financial investments.

There are several vaccines against coronavirus in Russia, but I advise you to choose only Sputnik V. It does not contain coronavirus. The SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus has nearly three dozen genes. The vaccine contains only one - the gene for the spike S-protein. This gene was chosen because the S-protein is located on the surface of the virus, therefore it is a target for the immune system. The physical presence of the original virus in the laboratory is not required to create a vaccine. That is, in principle, it is impossible to become infected with the coronavirus from a vaccine..."

The scientist dispelled other concerns about Sputnik:

“The Lancet published interim data from the third phase of clinical trials of a vaccine on a sample of more than twenty thousand people. Although the research may continue for a long time, this does not change the fact that the vaccinated people in this study were sick much less often. Moreover, the results for the Sputnik vaccine are similar to the results for other similar vaccines produced in other countries. I decided to be vaccinated with the Sputnik vaccine before this publication, because earlier in The Lancet there were impressive results on the effectiveness of a vector vaccine from CanSino Biologics, very similar to Sputnik V.

Indeed, the article about "Sputnik" in The Lancet has been criticized. But then the authors' answer was published there. When there is evidence of error or fraud in an article in a scientific journal of this level, the article is usually withdrawn. For example, The Lancet withdrew an article that unreasonably linked measles, rubella and mumps vaccinations with the development of autism. The article about the Sputnik vaccine has not been withdrawn. In addition, there are other articles about the effectiveness of this vaccine..."

All 20 of Panchin's arguments for vaccination can be read in full here.

***

The scientist's pathos is confirmed by dispassionate statistics, including Argentine data on the effectiveness, side effects and efficacy against new strains of covid Russian "Sputnik V", which was cited in his blog by analyst Maxim Averbukh.

As you know, Argentina has made 11.37 million inoculations with the Russian Sputnik V vaccine.

In addition to Sputnik, Argentina inoculates Astro-Zeneca and Sinovac.

Following a fairly massive Sputnik vaccination, Argentina has released several formal studies looking at the Sputnik's overall efficacy, side effects, and efficacy against strains from Alpha to Delta.

Argentina does not depend on Russia in any way and therefore the data can be considered as objective.

1. Report on side effects - which is extremely important in comparison with the data for Astro-Zenek and Sinovac :

Sputnik has much more mild side effects - a temporary rise in temperature and a temporary slight headache.

The serious side effect is as follows:

Satellite - 0.66 cases per 100 thousand doses

AstraZeneca - 0.41 cases per 100 thousand doses

Sinopharm - 0.16 cases per 100 thousand doses

As you can see, there is no particular difference in the context of a severe side effect between Sputnik and AstroZeneca.

And 1 case of severe side effects per 150,000 (one hundred fifty thousand) doses of Sputnik is practically harmless.

2. On the effectiveness of "Sputnik " against new strains of covid :

"The neutralizing ability of antibodies increased against different variants of the coronavirus (alpha, beta, gamma, delta and lambda), Argentine researchers found. With respect to the variants beta and gamma, there was a partial escape from In Russia, these variants have now been superseded by the "delta." The variant "lambda" was discovered in Peru at the end of last summer. WHO is still studying how infectious it is. This strain has not yet become widespread around the world.

The researchers took serum samples 42 days after the Sputnik vaccination and found that they were less effective in neutralizing the beta and gamma strains than the original Wuhan version. However, 120 days after vaccination, the situation changed: the neutralizing activity against "alpha", "beta", "gamma" and "delta" was higher compared to the Wuhan variant. It was slightly lower for lambda".

3. The effectiveness of the Russian vaccine was estimated by Argentine scientists at 84.8%.

AstroZeneca - 92%, Pfizer - 96%.

“We conducted a retrospective cohort study in which we analyzed people aged 60-79 years.

During the study period, 415,995 registered subjects received the first component of Gam-COVID-Vac; 40 387 people belonged to the 60-79 age group and were compared with 38 978 unvaccinated people.

The vaccine efficacy for the prevention of laboratory-confirmed infections was 78.6% [95% CI 74.8–81.7]; to reduce the number of hospitalizations -87.6%, deaths - 84.8%

The effectiveness was high in all subgroups.

As with other vaccines, a single dose of Gam-COVID-Vac has been effective for a wide range of COVID-19-related outcomes".

“Frankly speaking, the Argentine data is so convincing that all Russian media should force it. But they only mention a few. Therefore, I urge everyone to disseminate this data as widely as possible - almost certainly each of you will save more than one life, because the opinion that a quite high-quality Russian vaccine "Sputnik" is a low-quality "shmurdyak" is widespread not only among the audience of "Odnoklassniki", but alas and among a much more advanced audience of Facebook and Twitter", - sums up Averbukh