Avisa’s decision on Sputnik is absurd and has a political bias, says infectious disease expert Marcos Cassario

Avisa's decision on Sputnik is absurd and has a political bias, says infectious disease expert Marcos Cassario

Infectious disease doctor Marcos Casario termed the National Health Surveillance Agency (AVISA) decision as absurd, Not recommended importing Russian Sputnik V vaccine. “It makes no sense. I have no doubt that in this judgment, the analysis of the original has a political bias. This is absurd. This is a vaccine that we will already have in hand to carry on the chaos that the country is experiencing due to the coronovirus epidemic ”, he says.

Kesiro states that it is important to consider that the investigation may raise some issues related to documentation that may be missing. “But he made some unacceptable ideas.”

“Avisa is a bureaucratic organ, meaning it does not carry out any laboratory studies. They did not receive the vaccine and studied in the laboratory to see if they contained live viruses. They just took the documentation and read it ”, he explains.

For the infectious specialist, it is very unlikely that technicians at Gamalaya (Russian Biological Laboratory) sent documents with any irregularity.

In addition, he continues, Sputnik V has already been accepted in more than 62 countries and has gone through well-known regulatory bodies in Russia itself, in Mexico, in Argentina, and in many other countries.

United States and Europe

“Although it has not passed through the European Union and the United States, it is also meaningless. For example, what we are using here, AstraZeneca, which is of firochruz, has not been approved in the United States. There, at that time, only Pfizer, Modern and Janssen are approved for emergency use. Nevertheless, they will buy 62 million doses and should donate to other countries ”, revealed Kesaro.

READ  The 3-meter snake surprised the customers by coming on the shelf; Watch

He also states that Sputnik had published a study in Phase 3 in an international journal, and asks: “Have you heard reports of problems in any of these countries?”

In the opinion of the doctor, Anvisa was highly rigorous in the analysis of Russian vaccines and much less rigorous in the analysis of other vaccines. “For example, Coronavac has no publication in Phase 3”, he says.

About the author: Muhammad Wayne

"Travel enthusiast. Alcohol lover. Friendly entrepreneur. Coffeeaholic. Award-winning writer."

Related Posts

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *